Question of Constructive Criticism

[Goedric]

Hi all. I have had the pleasure of talking with some of you online in the chat room as well as on the boards a bit. I am new here and I have just started reading some of the imaginings that live here.

 

Today I was about to leave some comments, and well, I decided not to because I was afraid of how they might be taken, - not because I thought the work was bad, quite the reverse, - I felt the story was quite good, but that it had the potential to be even more exceptional. The particular story and the details are not important here.

 

My question is, how do you all approach giving criticism?

 

For me, if i love a story or have a few minor issues its easy enough. I would just speak up.

 

If a story isnt quite my thing topicwize i feel im a bad judge and I just leave any comments pro or con or constructive to those for whom the story is more kindred.

 

If i feel a story is in need of a serious overhaul I tend to frankly point out the things I felt were well done and then suggest than another draft be considered with maybe a bit of direction.

 

But when i read a really good story which for me takes a turn or otherwise misses being a great story, i am a little taken aback about how to broach the topic. Im just one reader after all and it feels odd giving the author serious advice no mater how heartfelt it is.

 

So how do others deal with this sort of thing.

 

?honest and straight forward?

?maybe a hey loved the story but have some ideas, let me know if your interested?

?or a sideways, have you every thought of.....?

 

 

(2) Another question, do authors want to hear about editing issues in stuff they have online or should i just ignore minor details like the annoying words which slip through spellcheck etc.

 

Anyway just interested how others approach giving constructive criticism.

 

Brazos

 

Jeff

[Cyhort]

Actually I try not to give criticism because I'm naturally snarky and it usually ends up coming out mean when I only wanna give some advice. Plus I kinda feel bad picking apart other people's writing. If I'm gonna say anything about a story I'll usually wait until I have something positive to say then proceed to gush like a 12 year old at a Twilight convention.

 

I don't leave much feedback.....

[Cia]

For me it varies depending on the author and how I think they will take criticism. How do they respond to other reviews or comments made about their work? If you are pretty sure they'll handle the comments and you have a few things that are general thoughts I'd tactfully put that in a review or forum comment. Questions to the plot and the direction it's going I almost always do as comments in their discussion forum because that is where the author and other readers can interact and really be open about the stories.

 

If your critiques are small items or really major things such as their structure and basic writing skills or you really aren't sure how they will take it. I would go with a pm, it's more private. A lot of the time I will offer comments and links to improve someone's writing if they are newer authors on the site via a pm rather than open up the issue in public. The only exception to that is if someone posts in the sneak peek area. I figure they are asking for my honest opinion on all aspects in that forum or they wouldn't be posting asking for them.

 

The biggest thing is not to flame anyone. As you said, you thought the story was good but could be better with some changes. Make sure you point out what you think really works and what you think doesn't and why it doesn't work. Give examples of changes you would make perhaps, or back-up your thoughts with writing facts or rules that pertain to the sections. Never just tear a chapter or story apart without keeping mind that a story is often a writer's baby and it all comes down to author's choice. They'll listen or not, but you're more likely to have an honest back and forth and positive experience if you keep these basic kindness in mind.

[PrivateTim]

My question is, how do you all approach giving criticism?

 

 

Amongst our criticisms are such diverse elements as: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice red uniforms......

 

No?

 

Okay, seriously I usually go the "really loved the story, but here are parts that didn't work work for me."

[jian_sierra]

I do it the way I want to be criticized. What I want is to be able to write better so I try to be constructive with my criticism of others. I usually start with things I like about the story and then points out things which didn't work for me (if there's any at all). As for editing crit, I try to stay away from them as I'm not really a native English speaker.

[Nephylim]

Well, personally I think that bad criticism is like a bad quesstion... it's only bad if it's not given. I think it's unfair, if you see a way that a story could be improved, that you don't give the autor the opportunity of improving it. There is absolutely no point in letting someone think either that their story is so good it can't do with improvement OR that it's so bad no one reads or wants to review it. Both of those are bad but the latter the worse.

 

What I tend to do if I see things that are weak in a story will depend on the author and the flaw. If I know the author I will be brutally honest in the review because it is only ever a word or two, or perhaps a slip in tense etc and all I have to say is ... It was hilarious when you said He looped around instead of looked around... or something.

 

If it is a new author or one i am not sure how they will take the criticism I might say something like... I loved the story and your storytellling skills are really strong but I would suggest you look for an editor because your tenses/typos/spelling could so with some work. This is usually what i say when there are just things that need to be tweaked or if the grammar etc is so bad it makes the story hard to read. (haha now those people I'/ve said that to will wonder which one I meant )

 

If it is something deeper that needs more comment then I send a pm. This is becuase I don't want them embarassed and possibly discouraged in public. However this is a two edged sword because if you don't leave it in the reveiw you might mislead potential readers who will get turned off once they start to read.

 

I suppose the condensed answer would be. If you see something you want to comment on you should but you should consider the way you do it and the place you do it.

[Ramon]

I think most authors welcome all comments as long as you are not simply flaming them. I'd go with an honest and straight forward comment about what I liked and didn't like and the reasons. Give specific examples and possible suggestions too. As for editing issues, if they are repetitive and really annoying then you can suggest they look for an editor. If the issues are simply a word or two that are wrong, I'd ignore it.

[Marzipan]

I would love to get straight forward criticism and see the weak points in my stories since I really am a forever learning writer, I started wrtiting only 6 minths ago so I'm grateful to get constructive fb. Even if I write with great passion and enthusiasm, I don't take it too seriously. Unless the crit is intended to be hurtful or belitteling I'm HAPPY to get it

[John Galaor]

Hi all. I have had the pleasure of talking with some of you online in the chat room as well as on the boards a bit. I am new here and I have just started reading some of the imaginings that live here.

 

Today I was about to leave some comments, and well, I decided not to because I was afraid of how they might be taken, - not because I thought the work was bad, quite the reverse, - I felt the story was quite good, but that it had the potential to be even more exceptional. The particular story and the details are not important here.

 

My question is, how do you all approach giving criticism?

 

For me, if i love a story or have a few minor issues its easy enough. I would just speak up.

 

If a story isnt quite my thing topicwize i feel im a bad judge and I just leave any comments pro or con or constructive to those for whom the story is more kindred.

 

If i feel a story is in need of a serious overhaul I tend to frankly point out the things I felt were well done and then suggest than another draft be considered with maybe a bit of direction.

 

But when i read a really good story which for me takes a turn or otherwise misses being a great story, i am a little taken aback about how to broach the topic. Im just one reader after all and it feels odd giving the author serious advice no mater how heartfelt it is.

 

So how do others deal with this sort of thing.

 

?honest and straight forward?

?maybe a hey loved the story but have some ideas, let me know if your interested?

?or a sideways, have you every thought of.....?

 

 

(2) Another question, do authors want to hear about editing issues in stuff they have online or should i just ignore minor details like the annoying words which slip through spellcheck etc.

 

Anyway just interested how others approach giving constructive criticism.

 

Brazos

 

Jeff

 

It is very difficult to criticize honestly, for even the slightest hint of criticism can wound the ego of the author. Unless an author has asked you directly for some help, I would not dare to criticize anyone, not even slightly.

I had done this precisely a few times, a veiled criticism, and I have regretted. The only criticism most authors accept gladly are full praises. It is difficult for an author, myself included, to think the praises are exaggerated or undeserved. Not that I had received any praises here in GA, for I do not. But I have had a lot for my stories in NIFTY. Then, I do not remember any case in which I thought the praises were exaggerated.

You can find the prove of this assertion by reading some twenty of thirty samples of praises on different stories here GA.

Many popular stories here are full of visits with a lot of flattery reviews. Then, some of the most popular stories are rather shoddy written. It has been a sort of discovery for me. You never end your learning.

 

Then, I think a rule of thumb of social intelligence is to praise everybody. To praise his stories, the clothes he wear, you should praise his intelligence when he opens his mouth, their hairdo, his new haircut, his shoes, etc. The most you praise others, the most intelligent you would look in the eyes of other people. So, the golden rule must be, praise always; do it generously, and never tell anything that you would guess other people would not understand, or ignore, or never had heard off.

If you present a low profile, people would not had a serious reason to hate you. Specially if you are prone to praise often your peers, and most of all to the alpha males or females on the site you are staying.

 

Then, forget about telling anyone any short of slight criticism whatever. Not any word about this.

[Collan]

It is very difficult to criticize honestly, for even the slightest hint of criticism can wound the ego of the author. Unless an author has asked you directly for some help, I would not dare to criticize anyone, not even slightly.

I had done this precisely a few times, a veiled criticism, and I have regretted. The only criticism most authors accept gladly are full praises. It is difficult for an author, myself included, to think the praises are exaggerated or undeserved. Not that I had received any praises here in GA, for I do not. But I have had a lot for my stories in NIFTY. Then, I do not remember any case in which I thought the praises were exaggerated.

You can find the prove of this assertion by reading some twenty of thirty samples of praises on different stories here GA.

Many popular stories here are full of visits with a lot of flattery reviews. Then, some of the most popular stories are rather shoddy written. It has been a sort of discovery for me. You never end your learning.

 

Then, I think a rule of thumb of social intelligence is to praise everybody. To praise his stories, the clothes he wear, you should praise his intelligence when he opens his mouth, their hairdo, his new haircut, his shoes, etc. The most you praise others, the most intelligent you would look in the eyes of other people. So, the golden rule must be, praise always; do it generously, and never tell anything that you would guess other people would not understand, or ignore, or never had heard off.

If you present a low profile, people would not had a serious reason to hate you. Specially if you are prone to praise often your peers, and most of all to the alpha males or females on the site you are staying.

 

Then, forget about telling anyone any short of slight criticism whatever. Not any word about this.

I have to agree here. If you truly want to make comments, I would PM the author first and ask if they're interesting in hearing what you have to say, and then make surethey're ok with you commenting on certain things before you actually any comments. Keep the exchange private.

 

When I first joined GA 6 years ago, I was naive enough to think that the requests for people to leave comments and feedback meant they actually wanted honest opinions. I discovered that no matter how diplomatically I tried to phrase things, anything negative was taken as an attack on the author, and usually not by the author, but by the author's friends and admirers who circled up the wagons against outside "attacks" from some newbie they didn't know. I came to feel at that time that GA was a very closed community and I didn't come back until just a few months ago.

 

Now I'll be the first to say that 6 years is a pretty long time and that the mix of people and authors here now is very different. It definitely feels more open now. Even so, I still am ultra-cautious in what I say and how I say it regarding the work here. I will only offer my positive opinions unless I have specific direct permission from the person involved that they are willing to hear anything they might perceive as negative. Constructive criticism is great, but it is still criticism and as such can have the potential to trigger defensive responses no matter how carefully phrased.

 

I think one of the biggest barriers is that when you start to get into a text-only environment as direct personal communication rather than as carefully considered fiction which has often been written and rewritten over a long period of time, you lose a significant layer of nuance in tone of voice and even facial expression which can then lead to a much higher level of misunderstanding and misinterpretation.

 

Anyway, that's my two cents.

[Matthew k]

I have to agree here. If you truly want to make comments, I would PM the author first and ask if they're interesting in hearing what you have to say, and then make surethey're ok with you commenting on certain things before you actually any comments. Keep the exchange private.

 

When I first joined GA 6 years ago, I was naive enough to think that the requests for people to leave comments and feedback meant they actually wanted honest opinions. I discovered that no matter how diplomatically I tried to phrase things, anything negative was taken as an attack on the author, and usually not by the author, but by the author's friends and admirers who circled up the wagons against outside "attacks" from some newbie they didn't know. I came to feel at that time that GA was a very closed community and I didn't come back until just a few months ago.

 

Now I'll be the first to say that 6 years is a pretty long time and that the mix of people and authors here now is very different. It definitely feels more open now. Even so, I still am ultra-cautious in what I say and how I say it regarding the work here. I will only offer my positive opinions unless I have specific direct permission from the person involved that they are willing to hear anything they might perceive as negative. Constructive criticism is great, but it is still criticism and as such can have the potential to trigger defensive responses no matter how carefully phrased.

 

I think one of the biggest barriers is that when you start to get into a text-only environment as direct personal communication rather than as carefully considered fiction which has often been written and rewritten over a long period of time, you lose a significant layer of nuance in tone of voice and even facial expression which can then lead to a much higher level of misunderstanding and misinterpretation.

 

Anyway, that's my two cents.

 

I know exactly how you feel. Not so much from GA, but from another site I used to read stories at. I stopped posting reviews because a lot of authors didn't really want feedback. I would say the people I read here are open to honest criticisms.

[Marzipan]

I see it like this: there is the review section to give supportive and maybe light reviews. There you can point out a what ever comes to your mind directly after reading. There you can let the author now in general what you thought about the story and how you felt after reading it. Sending personal messages to the authors is something I'd also do, especially if you want to give/get specific criticism. It is always nice to ask if they want it though. I love interacting with other authors.

 

In public reviews I seldomly leave negative comment's but I think I can see some good points every single story I have read. I have no need to put myself above others and try to find the holes in the stories. If I don't like them, I just generally move on fast and read something else. If the author has put their heart and soul in to the story, I appreciate it.

 

I never read stories written by people I dislike. That is my choice. I would never leave a neg comment because of my personal feelings about the author, so I just rather skip the story.

 

I feel it is ridiculous to put oneself above others and comment from high up there that some story doesn't deserve a) the amount of reviews b) the positive reviews c) the rep points d) the hype... I'd say everyone feel free to WRITE, READ and COMMENT, instead of scrutinizing other peoples actions. I think being polite has nothing to do with sucking up with people. Being nice has nothing to do with lying. Being active and supportive to your friends is not away from others. There is a line between constructive criticism and negative criticism.

 

Respect and be respected. I would not want to see GA turning into this competitive dog eat dog world.

 

With this said, I still personally would love the honest feedback. It just shows that the reader has actually read the story, focussed on it and wants to offer the author advice. I'm thankful of the feedback I get, I try to get learn from it even if I don't always agree with it. Via PM I have gotten a few pretty honest feedback that did not praise my work, but were left with thoughtful insight, humour and support. I treasure them most.

 

The biggest truth came from Collan: all authors take feedback differently. Some never see any flaws in their own work. The fact just is that not everyone can be pleased - not the authors or the readers.

[AnytaSunday]

I think constructive criticism is a good thing, especially if authors are serious about learning the craft. May I suggest writing to them in a PM, that way the exchange is done privately, which is better for those that are more sensitive. Also, you can ask them/feel them out for how well they respond and whether they mind if you write criticisms in the reviews or in GA stories discussion.

[Tipdin]

From experience here, I have learned not to give any comments at all, one way or the other.

 

However, in the real world, I think that it's important for readers to give feedback. If an author is serious and wants to become a better writer, then feedback is absolutely critical - especially if a reader does NOT like the story.

 

Grammar and punctuation are fairly simple, back and white issues for the most part. Content and delivery are more difficult things to deal with. Even if someone doesn't like the subject matter, they can still comment on whether the story was well told. In fact, if someone did not like the subject, they may make a better reviewer. Regardless of liking or not like the subject, reviews should be polite and direct. A reviewer must remember, however, that the story must remain the author's story, not theirs. I've had reviewers (not here) try to change my voice to theirs and that is not acceptable, that's not what the reviewer should be concerned with.

 

Also, simply saying 'Good job!' is not appropriate either. It's fine if you liked it, but WHY did you like it? WHAT made it likable for you? Comments regarding what did and did not work are the vehicles by which an author can become better at their craft. Analyzing how the project was done or asking why a specific construction choice was made allows for a deeper understanding from the point of view of the reader as to what the author intended, and from the point of view of the author as to what the reader gleaned from what was written.

 

If an author cannot survive a review, they really shouldn't be setting their work out for public consumption.

[John Doe]

I agree with who ever suggested to give criticism in private. I feel that's a more respectful manner rather than in the comments section, unless that is the author has stated its okay to post criticism as comments on their stories (which I am okay with). Like some folks here the stories I write here, I don't usually take too seriously... but I have come to the decision that if I want to be a real writer I should start taking everything I write seriously. (Added with life stuff, this is why I am no longer updating... spending more time with editing, etc.) Cricticism is a hard thing to give AND take. Some of us aren't too well versed in acceptance.... other's are only writing for "fun" and serious criticism will hinder and wound their confidence and "free spirit."

 

When someone offers feedback they should always give a reason why rather than just, "You should do this..." I have had that suggested to me and I shrug their suggestions off as meaningless. Why should I do as suggest? There's no suggestion s or reasons as to why? Another is word choice.... diction is an important thing, but just because an author uses a word you're not familiar or have an afinity with doesn't mean it's wrong. I had a reader told me that my usage of describing a "backed turned towards me" as "His back was facing me," was wrong cause "a back can't 'face' something." Though that same reader also stated that certain scenes he didn't like (and he gave me a slew of reasons that for me were irrelevant... color choice in setting and character clothing, etc...) but I did reread over those scenes and saw that they need revisions. Usually a reader can pick up in areas that need work, but because they aren't writers they aren't sure what's missing... or they know something is wrong and/or missing but can't explain so they start making any excuse to reason why that area or that part or the story didn't work and these reasons may be way off. A writer needs to realize that these aren't malicious in nature but rather something is not right with the writing. Sometimes the reader pinpoints the issues and other times they are completely off.

 

So what I'm trying to say is... give the criticism if the author asks for it. As writers, we should be able to discern what's important and what isn't. And I also believe that if we want to continue to write, continue posting stories on here, it should be a goal of ours to get better. To add, when I give criticism I'm honest and starightforward, and always gives a reason for my suggestions. I explain out my reasons rather than just say, "It sounds better." Statement like those are useless. Help the writer make his story better overall, by fitting everything together with the story's theme. Why does it sound better would be the more appropriate explanation.

 

 

And if you are like me, you should give a disclaimer before you give any feed back. I come off as a harsh reviewer. People tend to focus on the words that "this area doesn't seem right" (they read it as 'THIS IS WRONG!') rather than focus on the "but here's why and what may be wrong with it." I always tell people to read through my comment before they make a response and really evaluate my comments. Writing is a passion for me, and I want people to succeed. So be sure your criticism is constructive, not shallow, and you have the author's permission and I would recommend privacy also.

[John Galaor]

I think constructive criticism is a good thing, especially if authors are serious about learning the craft. May I suggest writing to them in a PM, that way the exchange is done privately, which is better for those that are more sensitive. Also, you can ask them/feel them out for how well they respond and whether they mind if you write criticisms in the reviews or in GA stories discussion.

 

 

As I have less social intelligence than a sea turtle, I dare to add a few more words.

This post is not meant as a reply to AnytaSunday commentary, but to the former three or four posts.

 

1) To criticize openly is like to show some form of superiority, either real or imaginary. Then, nobody wants to treat with superiors, except to praise them for they are rich, or are just authors that died hundred years ago or more.

 

2) To criticize faintly or discreetly is equivalent to portrait oneself as an equal. And most people do not want to be the equal of someone we had not been dinning and drinking with. If you had not any special friendship with him, you would not accept even a veiled criticism. This is only tolerable for friends or lovers. I mean, faint criticisms.

 

3) If you are fanatic enough to write very well, or have a fetish for a perfect prose, is advisable not to post it in GA, or in any other place whatever. Summing up, do not post it.

 

Why? To write well is equivalent to brag of a superiority over the readers. This would be enough reason to hate you.

Everybody has already his case full of heroes, gods of sports, movies, punk music and even gods of literature. Then the case is so full that one has barely enough room for his own ego; that since our timid adolescence has grown very big.

 

4) To write badly does not offend anyone. I would dare to say it is a good thing, for it sort of enhances the talent of the reader. So, he can see a badly written story as a divine revelation of his own superiority as a writer.

So, I think there is not any reason to hate or despise a bad writer, for it does not belittle in the least our ago.

The worse that could happen to us is boredom. And the cure for this boredom is to stop reading.

 

In fact, is very difficult to appraise how many stories we had petitioned and had been read entirely.

A five percent does not look an exaggeration to me. I would be very glad if one out of forty people who had download any of my stories would had read it till the end. That would be great, a 2.5% of people arriving to the end of one of my stories. The most probably figure would be less than 0.25%

[ricky]

Most authors want to make their stories better and want to be better writers overall. I have thick skin but not all writers, especially young ones do.

 

If you approach it from, "You have a great story, but I think it could be better if . . . . But of course, this is one person's opinion"

 

And I would do it in a PM, not in a review.

[Cia]

John Galaor, you have made two comments that completely baffle me and I shall respond to them in the hopes of keeping this on topic and in relation to feedback offered via reviews, comments, and 'likes' made here on GA itself.

 

Why? To write well is equivalent to brag of a superiority over the readers. This would be enough reason to hate you.

 

4) To write badly does not offend anyone. I would dare to say it is a good thing, for it sort of enhances the talent of the reader. So, he can see a badly written story as a divine revelation of his own superiority as a writer

 

Essentially, what I read into your comments, is that someone who takes the time to write well, to follow basic grammar rules and structural format; someone who gives thought and puts work into writing a story as unique and as interesting as possible, should be 'hated' because they are typically well-liked. Instead, we should hate them because they are trying to make people feel bad because they are doing something the reader can't? That a lack of perceived flaws in their writing is meant to taunt the reader and say, 'Look what I can do, aren't I special???' In return, since the reader is outraged that this person is so skilled and dares to share that, we should dislike them and not comment favorably or review or 'like' their work?

 

In response to your other comment you imply that you are in fact showing your reader respect for their intelligence by posting a work that is full of flaws and mistakes. That they are able to see that you use a word incorrectly or fail to use basic writing structural rules means that they are smart and can figure out what you really meant. After all, writing well is insulting them by making them feel inferior based on your logic, correct? So when someone writes a work that is subpar to any acceptable writing standard generally held they are actually superior to someone who makes that effort to do things correctly?

 

That is, in my opinion, total bunk. Perhaps even something someone who cannot string a paragraph together in a cohesive fashion would say in order to soothe their wounded pride that someone else gets more readers, attention, and feedback than they do. No writer is perfect, everyone can use improvement in some aspect. Failing to accept that no one is without flaws and working to reduce those by making yourself better as a writer is not something someone should ever be hated for. Sitting back and saying, why should I make any effort to become more than I am when someone else out there will always be more popular however, is truly shameful. The feedback system here on GA is meant for a reason. To encourage and help writers to IMPROVE.

 

Just last week a reader wrote a thoughtful, personal review for a story I had written and posted months ago. They pointed out a line that they felt didn't fit and what they would use instead. I read their comment, considered it, and changed the line to something between what my original and the suggestion was. That's the true intent of the system and anyone who can't see that value should not post here without saying, 'don't give me feedback, I won't listen to it.' Everyone else should try to take advantage whenever possible.

[John Galaor]

John Galaor, you have made two comments that completely baffle me and I shall respond to them in the hopes of keeping this on topic and in relation to feedback offered via reviews, comments, and 'likes' made here on GA itself.

-------------

 

You have written a sort of "critic of the pure reason" in a sort of Kantian style.

I was only doing a light rant on human relations as a reflection on my own experience in life. If I had a different experience, I would be painting a different portrait. Then, my words do not pretend to paint a true image of reality, for I am not any sure of how objective reality is. I am only trying to figure it.

 

Then, do not worry for any of the silly things I am saying.

I am a lonely nerd with very little social experience. That's all.

[Lugh]

hey Jeff! (waves)

 

how about first off not leaving story review comments on the profile comments! LOL PM, forum, reviews... but not the profile -- it cuts them off. I do appreciate the thought though, just wish I could read the whole thing.

 

now I posted a nice little do's and don'ts list of how to give feedback in the editor's lounge... you all should read that if you don't know how to give feedback.

 

John Galaor you really need to look at it. Sending people "thinly veiled critical" emails about chapter four of a multiple chaptered story when youv'e not read chapters one, two, or three and then complaining that you don't understand it isn't working for me.

 

Neither is whining about word frequencies or the choice of my prepositions. Perchance you need a refresher course in English as another language?

 

I like feedback. Any feedback so long as it's solid in the story. If you see a problem, by all means point it out. I misspell things all the time, loose track of characters, lose track of plots... put things down and forget to pick them back up even. And by golly my editors are only human.

 

You can email me, PM me, post in my forum... catch me in chat... whatever makes you feel comfortable, and you can ask around... I don't bite the heads off people who are honest in their views even if I don't agree or like it: nephy, mandra, cia, quonus, myr, comicfan, reneee, and others can attest to that. I review when I have time. I don't have much time, at least not if you all want some of those "in progress" stories to move to the "complete" pile.

 

Now as for this site... GayAuthors.org is a site for authors and readers to come togehter. If the readers are "afraid" to give feedback, then why are we here? How can the authors expect to become better? Many of us do not want to be stuck in "acceptable" all our lives. Some of us have bigger egos than we have writing skills. Should an author (or if you are an author, a reader) become too big for his britches, a moderator needs to know. Immediately. And that includes me.

 

So, enjoy your reading, writing, reviewing, critical ripping of each other to shreds, and I'll see you on the wild side.

[C James]

I for one give my profound and heartfelt thanks for any and all feedback, be it public or private, praise or criticism.

 

To those that read stories here, and take the time to give a review, a forum post, or feedback of any sort, even if it just a one sentence PM saying "Hi", I thank you, for feedback is so oft the stuff of gold for any author.

 

1) To criticize openly is like to show some form of superiority, either real or imaginary. Then, nobody wants to treat with superiors, except to praise them for they are rich, or are just authors that died hundred years ago or more.

 

In a word, preposterous.

 

Many authors, myself included, ASK for criticism. Someone giving us constructive criticism, openly or otherwise, is doing us a favor. A favor I for one am most thankful for.

 

3) If you are fanatic enough to write very well, or have a fetish for a perfect prose, is advisable not to post it in GA, or in any other place whatever. Summing up, do not post it.

 

Splendid advice, if you're after a world where good authors have no readers whatsoever (due to never posting their work) and GA is the realm of only bad writers and would soon cease to exist. I have no interest in such a world, nor do I see it possessing one iota of allure.

 

Why? To write well is equivalent to brag of a superiority over the readers. This would be enough reason to hate you.

To write well is a goal, one of self-improvement, an inner peace, an act of sharing, a sense of verve perhaps, or simply joy... it may be all these things, or merely some. What it most certainly is not is braggadocio. Perhaps you would do well to ponder why you believe it so.

[John Galaor]

I for one give my profound and heartfelt thanks for any and all feedback, be it public or private, praise or criticism.

 

To those that read stories here, and take the time to give a review, a forum post, or feedback of any sort, even if it just a one sentence PM saying "Hi", I thank you, for feedback is so oft the stuff of gold for any author.

 

In a word, preposterous.

 

Many authors, myself included, ASK for criticism. Someone giving us constructive criticism, openly or otherwise, is doing us a favor. A favor I for one am most thankful for.

 

I take the rap gladly. The pending question is to agree about what is to write a good or a bad story.

This must be the "holy grail" of literature.

 

Underneath my words are several layers of meaning. One is the meaning of what good literature is, or what is an acceptable prose, or an excellent prose, if such a thing exists, and what is a story badly written. Unless we have some sort of accord on the meaning of these concepts, we are wasting the time with arguments.

 

I am not an expert in literature, and I suppose no one is either an expert here. Nevertheless, I would not call either an expert into these arguments, for I had observed a discrepancy between the value given to their master works of literature and my experience as a reader.

 

The same case happens here. I had seen many popular stories that I cannot bear to read more than a few lines. And I had seen other excellent written stories that are total orphans, with a nearly total lack of popularity.

 

I had been reading some mainstream novels. I learned my English by reading novels. Then, the so called bestsellers had a quality of being easy to read as well as pleasant at reading. I am in favor of that; that a novel would be pleasant to read. And to be pleasant, I suppose the story has to have some quality of being easy to understand.

 

From this perspective, I am in the same flock as many contemporary readers that cannot read Ulysses, Hamlet, or In Search of Lost Time. I don't want to make a list too long.

 

Then, if we come back here. I am confronted with the same problem. What is a good story? What is a story well written?

 

Why I cannot not stand reading more than five lines of some popular authors here? What is really the problem? I am naive enough to think that a good prose, as different from the whole story, has to have the quality of "being easy to read".

It cannot be a sort of torture, like when you are reading the first page of Ulysses, or some nineteen century novels.

 

Then, I am not at this moment contemplating the whole novel as good or bad in itself, as a finished unit. I am considering the problem, that a good novel has to be good, even if sampled in small parts. I open a novel at random and start to read a paragraph. Well, this paragraph has to have enough consistence to take care of itself. Just imagine a paragraph of only five lines. What can be the problem if you cannot read even five lines? You cannot complain that the story is too long, or too short. You cannot expect this small paragraph taken as a random sample would be very funny, or very sad, or otherwise extraordinary. The least that we can expected from such a small sample of three or five lines is... "not to being rebuffed and stop reading".

Sadly, I have to confess that many stories I tried to read here show this problem from the very first paragraph. And this is very sad.

I can understand that when a novel is too long we are tired sometimes and commit an error here and there, or a little chain of errors. It is difficult to spot these errors for some studies had proved that the eye reads by jumping. It makes about two or three jumps on each line. Then, the brain put the words that go in between those points on each jump. Then, if an error is between those two points, you cannot see it. There is another problem, the story can be very clear in the mind of the writer, but is is not so clear when put into written words.

Then, the reader has to have the capacity of reconstructing the same story the writer intended to put in the story. For the eye of the reader does not stops in the same places as the eye of the writer.

 

Then, most times, the author has many more ideas in a concrete scene that he puts into writing.

Then, the reader has to have power of divination to figure it what the writer has in his mind.

 

With these words I do not mean that an author has to put excessive detail into their stories. I do not like Proust at all, that tired readers with an unending description of irrelevant details of the innumerable decorative elements in a lounge. He could expend like two or three pages describing the elements of the damned lounge. This is an abomination to any contemporary reader.

 

Anyway, I think I am wasting my time telling all this trash. I think all you know well this problem.

I am not going to tell you that exists something huge that is called the Pacific Ocean.

[John Galaor]

I for one give my profound and heartfelt thanks for any and all feedback, be it public or private, praise or criticism.

 

To those that read stories here, and take the time to give a review, a forum post, or feedback of any sort, even if it just a one sentence PM saying "Hi", I thank you, for feedback is so oft the stuff of gold for any author.

 

 

 

In a word, preposterous.

 

Many authors, myself included, ASK for criticism. Someone giving us constructive criticism, openly or otherwise, is doing us a favor. A favor I for one am most thankful for.

 

 

 

 

Splendid advice, if you're after a world where good authors have no readers whatsoever (due to never posting their work) and GA is the realm of only bad writers and would soon cease to exist. I have no interest in such a world, nor do I see it possessing one iota of allure.

 

 

 

To write well is a goal, one of self-improvement, an inner peace, an act of sharing, a sense of verve perhaps, or simply joy... it may be all these things, or merely some. What it most certainly is not is braggadocio. Perhaps you would do well to ponder why you believe it so.

 

Ok, James. You have a truck full of reasons.

 

I was talking from the perspective of my own experience. I do not know a a word about others.

I had a experience both ways; one as a receptor of critics from my stories, and as a transmitter of critics to other writers.

 

Well, in both cases, the experience had been a total disappointment. Well, except with just one person that made perfect critics to my stories. He was a sort of magician.

I was disappointed on the receiving end of criticism. For they rarely understood well the story, or put wrong criticism to things that were right. On a few other cases, some ladies were complaining that my stories were too clear. As a lady put it, "if you said it all, what do you let for the readers to discover? They should make an effort to understand the story, coming and going back and for, to understand what the author was trying to say." She said this was one of pleasures of literature to find out why the author was saying this or that absurd thing.

I could not be less in accord with this idea. To me, a story should be written with such a care that the reader would not stump on any obstacle in his pleasure of reading.

 

About giving out criticism to others, I had found the same problem as here in GA. Very few authors have any sensibility over such a trifle as if their stories are understandable or not. They assume they are clear enough and do not not need any corrections.

 

I remember a story a lady had started telling about someone who was walking slowly by a steep street, and the author expended like a page and a half describing the scene without stating "who was" the creature that was acting.

In Spanish the verbs do not need the help of a pronoun to work properly. So, I told her, how do you write a story without telling "who is" walking on this street? I do not know if it was a dog, or human male, a female, a boy, a girl, an old man, an old woman, a hobo, or what. She did not apparently realize this was a problem for a reader.

 

I suppose she new perfectly what she was writing about, she who the character was. But she was unable to realize that the reader have not the ability to read the mind of the writer.

 

As a reader, how could I picture in my mind the agent that was acting in this story? I cannot read a story if I could not see it like in a sort of movie. There is not any need to explain too much in detail how people is clothed. If the author do not tell this I assume the characters are clad in a standard way for the natural setting of the story. It is like with the faces, there is not any obligation to paint a portrait of the character's faces. If the author does not explain this point I can figure any face I would fancy.

But in general, the problem of the story is that it has to be readable without much effort. On a second front, the story has to be exciting or interesting or pleasant to read.

 

Then, summing up my experience, there is like a chasm, an abyss between some authors and the readers. As a reader you can tell some author some problems you have with their stories but they do not understand, or would not accept your commentaries. He thinks are... "preposterous". i borrow your word, James.

 

Then, it seems to me, that reviews had became some sort of social event to tell niceties to the authors. Nothing more.

[Jwolf]

About giving out criticism to others, I had found the same problem as here in GA. Very few authors have any sensibility over such a trifle as if their stories are understandable or not. They assume they are clear enough and do not not need any corrections.

 

Then, summing up my experience, there is like a chasm, an abyss between some authors and the readers. As a reader you can tell some author some problems you have with their stories but they do not understand, or would not accept your commentaries. He thinks are... "preposterous". i borrow your word, James.

 

Then, it seems to me, that reviews had became some sort of social event to tell niceties to the authors. Nothing more.

 

It troubles me that this is your perception of most authors on this sight. It might be my naivete, but I've seen very few authors here, or otherwise, pompous enough to disregard a reader's comments because they feel they are the end all, be all of writing. This perception of yours is either highly exaggerated or an indication of isolated incidents that you have made the rule, and not the exception, in my opinion. I for one, have received my fair share of praise and criticism. On a number of occasions, I've missed a basic edit or went too vague on a detail, taking the reader out of the story enough to need to comment. In every single case, I've considered the suggested change and made it if I saw fit. On the occasions where I found the critique would detract from my story or style, I replied to the reader with my reasons for not making the suggested change, but only after careful consideration. I doubt anyone here presumes to be above critique, whether they always agree with it or not.

 

In regards to your observation regarding the social niceties of reviews, I would have to disagree with you again. Reviews on a site like this aren't meant to pin point every grammar mistake, tense issue, improper phrasing, or missed word. They are meant to encourage authors who don't have the luxury of a Times Review or to see their names on a Best Seller's list. For a GA author with enough balls to post their work, reviews, both positive and negative, are the only currency one can point to as to how their work is received. The niceties you witness are tactful bouts of praise meant to encourage, in most cases, not highlight every single flaw (and on most occasions come from fellow writers or properly raised readers who know just how much courage it takes to post something to begin with and would never dream of publicly bashing someone's hard work. My personal reason for offering review "niceties" on the occasion I find a story I like is to encourage other readers to give it a chance). For the rest, we have PMs, forum discussion boards, etc. If I saw you at a party with spinach in your teeth, I wouldn't announce it over the microphone. I'd pull you aside to the restroom and point it out kindly. I view the review system in much the same way. If you want to bash my story, or a chapter, or even just a phrase, via review, I wouldn't mind, but I feel like most readers here have the tact to send a PM instead, of which I'm more than eternally grateful. More critique will breed better stories, I agree with you on that John; respectfully, on most everything else, I have to disagree.

[John Galaor]

It troubles me that this is your perception of most authors on this sight. It might be my naivete, but I've seen very few authors here, or otherwise, pompous enough to disregard a reader's comments because they feel they are the end all, be all of writing. This perception of yours is either highly exaggerated or an indication of isolated incidents that you have made the rule, and not the exception, in my opinion. I for one, have received my fair share of praise and criticism. On a number of occasions, I've missed a basic edit or went too vague on a detail, taking the reader out of the story enough to need to comment. In every single case, I've considered the suggested change and made it if I saw fit. On the occasions where I found the critique would detract from my story or style, I replied to the reader with my reasons for not making the suggested change, but only after careful consideration. I doubt anyone here presumes to be above critique, whether they always agree with it or not.

 

In regards to your observation regarding the social niceties of reviews, I would have to disagree with you again. Reviews on a site like this aren't meant to pin point every grammar mistake, tense issue, improper phrasing, or missed word. They are meant to encourage authors who don't have the luxury of a Times Review or to see their names on a Best Seller's list. For a GA author with enough balls to post their work, reviews, both positive and negative, are the only currency one can point to as to how their work is received. The niceties you witness are tactful bouts of praise meant to encourage, in most cases, not highlight every single flaw (and on most occasions come from fellow writers or properly raised readers who know just how much courage it takes to post something to begin with and would never dream of publicly bashing someone's hard work. My personal reason for offering review "niceties" on the occasion I find a story I like is to encourage other readers to give it a chance). For the rest, we have PMs, forum discussion boards, etc. If I saw you at a party with spinach in your teeth, I wouldn't announce it over the microphone. I'd pull you aside to the restroom and point it out kindly. I view the review system in much the same way. If you want to bash my story, or a chapter, or even just a phrase, via review, I wouldn't mind, but I feel like most readers here have the tact to send a PM instead, of which I'm more than eternally grateful. More critique will breed better stories, I agree with you on that John; respectfully, on most everything else, I have to disagree.

 

Well, I thoroughly assume the rap.

I accept most of what you say in your post. And well, I was really exaggerating. I really was.

 

I had found that some stories, or styles of writing, that I dislike are most popular; while other stories that I like are mostly orphans.

Of course, I had read so far only about 60 or 80 stories out of perhaps more than a thousand ten thousand stories that are here. Nevertheless I had read some three hundred stories in nifty. Well, in a time span of some years.

 

I also understand the need of encouraging new writers and praise them, even if they are not very good at the present stage.

To arrive to a point of being a good writer you have to begin by being not a good one. It is like a process of training.

 

Nevertheless, I think I had praised so far more than 30 stories. In most cases, I did not say a word about some obvious defects of the story. In the few cases I said something critical, but my comments sent in PM were not welcomed. I understand this reaction, for I do not remember but just a case in which I accepted some critics. Then, our egos are sort of impermeable to criticisms. I am also involved in this. An hour ago, I was watching a video on the British novel and I heard some authors criticizing more or less harshly their colleagues. I had read also about disqualifications among the Spanish writers of the first part of 20 Century. So, to reject criticism is a part of being a writer and of rejecting the works of your competitors.

 

I had become very fastidious with my perfectionism, but this is mostly a defect, I suppose. Most professional writers are not very good either, even if many of them have an with an editor or two, and also have helpers to develop some plots.

 

In other cases, but also in books shops, I had found stories so badly written that I would not dare to say a word.

Then it would not be a miracle if with some stories here I cannot read more than a few lines and get tired.

I mean... if I have not reasons to tell something nice top an author, I must shut up.

 

And to end all this, I can be rather frustrated anyway. This embitters anyone.