Want some writing advice? Ignore any advice...
I read an interesting article this morning, which really got me thinking.
First off - a link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/russell-smith/want-some-writing-advice-ignore-any-advice/article1927034/
I'm not sure how I feel about what he says, to be honest. On one hand, I completely disagree with him - if it hadn't been for the honest feedback I received on my work, I would still be stuck in the doldrums of the beginning of the last century, drowning in a sea of adjectives (which I know it a fast-track to Rejectionsville nowadays, and have tweaked my natural rather baroque style into something I am *hoping* is a little more agreeable to the modern literary palate) ... but on the other hand, I do see what he is saying. Which brings me to something I have noticed on every single writing site I have been to, and has forced me to ask myself this question an awful lot: is it critique, or is it just 'wish-listing' on behalf of the critic?
We all have our own preferences in writing. Personally, I'm not really a fan of the modern preoccupation with literary austerity, and so I don't write this way. Put plainly, I don't like this whole 'simple sentences with little to no description' thang - I know it is unfashionable right now, but what the hell, it's a taste thing. So why would (and indeed, should) I write a style I don't like reading? But in every single critique I receive, at least one person will either tell me to pare it down or re-write bits so that the piece fits their taste, leaving me feel a little... I don't know. Not annoyed as such - I'm grateful for the feedback - but... deflated? I end up reading the suggested changes, and they're never bad... but they don't sound like *me*. It always ends up sounding exactly what it is - someone else's work. And I do wonder just how useful that is sometimes - after all, what is the point of writing if you cannot claim ownership of it?
One of the comments on the site hit a particular chord with me:
"One of my grad supervisors kept returning drafts of my thesis literally heavy with red ink. By the 2nd time, I realized that many of his suggestions had self-cancelled and I was effectively back at my original wording."
I've experienced this myself - where critiques by the same person end up contradicting themselves to the point where, in one piece they say 'ooo, no; don't do that!' then, in another, they suggest you do exactly the thing they last advised you to avoid - and I tied myself up in knots trying to satisfy both criteria. And what did I end up with? An absolute mess of a piece that I ended up abandoning out of sheer frustration, because I couldn't get it 'right'. I'm a little way further down the path now (not that far; I've spent a lot of time sniffing the roses and watching the clouds drifting by, which I have been summarily had my metaphorical legs slapped copious amounts of times when it came to feedback time! Old habits dies very hard, especially when you're enjoying yourself...) and realise that you can't please all the people all the time, but that niggling feeling that if you're not slavishly following critiques, you're somehow 'slacking off' is hard to shake. Which leads me back to the article - how do other people feel about this chap's point of view? Have we gone too far down the road (his point about us not learning to be writers, but critics in writers' clothing), or is he just spouting a load of bunk?
Comments
Subscribe
Visitor counter
Blog Roll Centre
Blog Hints
36 Comments
Like you I don't fancy literary genre and I was ask to make an opinion it will be crap no matter how well-written the book is! It goes the same for style, language, ideas and drama (ofcourse for me!).
The point is that not everything is everyone's cup of tea! I can't imagine catching the attention of a writer with my story if fantasy, drama and romance is not their cup of tea. For example, I know for a fact that my dad would think that my story sucks! Doesn't mean it does.
Knowing that I can treasure the critics given to me who somewhat like the plot. Those comments I do consider seriously. Yet again, it's my story, my baby and I want to bring up the way she looks best as long as she keeps all I want for her. I do believe that we get into a flow and land up writing a lot of crap which is where critics work THE BEST. All the same, they are suggestions for me to consider, but in the end the call is mine!
All I can say is I may like Lucy as snow white but if you think she should perform as Alice in the wonderland then that's how it is!! You can give her a princess look but you must keep what your heart says is best for her because afterall it's your baby!! :D Having said that as you would never give up working hard for Lucy, I believe you shouldn't give up on Alicia either. Not even if you land up in a mess, you'll have to clear it for her sake. Keep your faith strong.
PS that chat message was mine this time. I kind off figuredit out ;)
xxxxx
The writer who spoke before his lecture had been Margaret Atwood who read out a chapter from one of her novels. Wow. What a scary woman! I had not read the book and intend to do so.
From his lecture, I would have given Mark Haddon's books a miss. (I have not read any) I am just not clever enough to understand them. This is not to disparage Mark Haddon who came across as rather likeable. I think I was a bit tired as I had been at work all day and had already attended a book event at a library before going to the South Bank later in the evening. I will read his book, I just wanted to make the point.
From both events, it would seen there is still an interest in the literary novel. Incidentally, I did not read out at the library event and had i done so, i would have read the beginning of the novel I am reading at the moment. "The Girl who played with fire' and I would.in effect, have read out a graphic sexual scene. I showed the chapter to the boss, as it were, and was rather advised not too.
I left shortly afterwards, but my reading could well have livened things up a bit.
For me, the most useful feedback comes when someone has read a great chunk of a writer's work and can take a broad view of it. My current novel has been turned inside out by my agent over the past two years, as she's sent it back to me several times with suggestions for revisions, all of which were exactly what was needed. She dealt with the broad storylines, the characters' motivations, the timing of various events, the need to make the hero stronger and keener to take the initiative, cutting back on a minor character's story, and other topics that helped me to see where I could make improvements. She even suggested that I watch The Vicar of Dibley to see how a small cast of characters can drive the plot along with very little need for other characters to intervene. She didn't get involved in the nit-picking, detailed stuff - that all jumped out at me when I re-read what I'd written. And continues to do so!
But that sort of critique is difficult to carry out here when we are, of necessity, dealing with work chapter by chapter (other than short stories and poems, of course). I think that is where top-quality editorial consultancies, such as the Writers' Workshop, come into their own because they are working with the entire manuscript, and it's why they are worth the investment if you can afford to make it.
I'm currently ripping the guts of my story out as we speak, and literally no chapter has been left alone - I've eviscerated every single one. Forget grammar and sentence structure; I'm re-plumbing the entire thing! In a way, it's hideously painful, but it *needs* doing (if I can see it, then potential agents / editors / readers will *definitely* see - one thing I have learned is there is no point in being precious about scenes - if they don't work, or they ring false, they're OUT. It's breaking my heart, but it has too happen...), but even after that, I'm going to need someone to read it all to see if a) I've done everything (plot, pacing, characters etc) justice and b) it all makes sense to someone who doesn't have my 'insider knowledge', which is something just posting the odd chapter up here and there isn't going to be able to achieve. This is the main reason I created a private group for my novel - that way I can post up all the chapters, so people I trust can look at them if they want to. The one thing I have said it 'I don't need nit-picky stuff - I need big, broad brush strokes, like 'does this even make sense' and 'do you believe this character would do this?'. Spelling and stuff like that - even clumsy wording - I can fix later; at the moment, it's just not important!
One thing that does tick me off, though, is people who don't read horror, for example, critiquing and saying things like 'this is too gory' or 'this has too much swearing in it'. That bugs me. I know it shouldn't - it should be a case of a mental 'thanks, but no thanks!', but it does. Which is why I don't tend to critique out of my genres, to be honest. I know a lot of people will argue that I am deliberately limiting myself, and that you don't need to be a 'specialist' to be helpful, but when people are tell you to change what essentially makes up your genre, then I fail to see just how helpful that is - if anything, I just found it ate away at every single shred of confidence I thought I had, and for a while at least, I was writing stuff in a style I *loathed* just to please those people (to show that I was taking on board what they said and was learning, I suppose), which kind of defeats the whole object of seeking critique in the first place! But, then again, I could argue that I came out of the other side in a stronger position than I entered it... so maybe it wasn't all useless at all *cue Twilight Zone music*.
In every stage of the editing process, feedback can be divided as follows: there should hopefully be suggestions that I think of as 'slap yourself on the head moments' ie things that, on some level, you were aware yourself that something wasn't working as well as it could/should. Then there might be some advice that you absolutely reject. You are the author and this is your privilege. It does make sense to think carefully first though before rejecting anything out of hand though. It's good to be challenged so that you can see whether your version is justified or not. Then there might be suggestions that you adapt ie you agree with the issue, but not the proposed solution, instead coming up with some other change that works better for you, perhaps elsewhere, but which resolves the issue or makes it irrelevant.
Inevitably, critiquing a chapter or section of a much longer work has to concentrate on the micro, not the macro. There is an inherent lack of context, so it's not possible to get the bigger picture and question if plot developments are convincing, or if characters appear flat or contradictory etc. This type of critique can give feedback along the lines of whether or not there's a compelling voice or pleasing prose rhythm. If it's the opening pages of a book, feedback can let you know if people want to read on or not. You need to know what sort of feedback is suited for the material you are submitting for critique and ignore anything else.
And most of all, you need to ride over the pain of negative (as oppsoed to constructive) criticism. It's undermining and destructive and will almost definitely say more about the person doing the criticising than it does about the person who wrote the scene. No one has the right to discourage someone from writing which can happen all too easily if the criticism they receive just says something that is the equivalent of 'Yuk. That's rubbish.' Why is it 'rubbish'? What is there about it that's not working? How could this be remedied? (At least, according to the person doing the criticising. In this respect, critiques have similarities to creative writing ie show, not tell!)
There will ALWAYS be something positive that can be said about a piece of writing. It's vital for the confidence of the writer for them to be shown what they do well and where their strengths lie, not just point out perceived problems.
And never forget: Decca refused the Beatles. You could be the next literary Beatles, and if someone tells you 'Guitar bands are finished' - or the literary equivalent - kick the dust off your shoes, and walk on. (Into the sunset...) (Towards glory...)
Guero - 'being objective, subjectively' makes perfect sense. Well chosen words. You must be a writer! I look forward to meeting you at York too.
Oh and Mike - the Festival is a celebration of writing in every genre.
Guero - I like that! Writing will forever be subjective (I read a signature on IMDB today that read 'if we all liked the same movies, there would only be one movie', which I rather liked and think fits literature very well, too - indeed, if we all liked the same books, there would only be room for one book!), but it doesn't mean we leave objectivity by the door. I'm finding this exact thing at the moment - Wrath's just given me some wonderfully objective advice based on what amounts to his subjective opinion, but the way he suggested it has inspired me rather than disheartened me... y'hear that, Wrathers! You're officially an inspiration by making me look at things differently, y'bastard! XD
To be either loved or hated is what we should aim for. Far worse to just be ignored!
So what we are hopefully saying is....if the work is strong enough someone out there will like it and be prepared to take a chance.
Really looking forward to York now!
Mac
So what does DB get right? Because there has to be something, eh? I reckon it's pace - in that aspect he's spot on. Even to the extent that he can get away with everything else being so riddled with holes.
That and she gives me hope. Hope that there, contrary to everything I've read, there is still a market out there for us who are fully paid up members of Overwriters Anonymous! ^^p
I despair sometimes, I really do... and then I giggle. A lot. It's the only way to cope!
Click here to sign up now.