Jump to content


A small proposal (not a story)


  • Please log in to reply
159 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_Anonymous_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 06:38 AM

Note: Before I start, I will say that everything I write is IMHO and not meant to offend anyone. I'm trying not to sound preachy or anything, but it is possible I'll come across that way if I go ahead with the plan I detail below.

I shouldn't be writing this.

I should be working on DoB. Or on the half-finished story I was writing for last quiz. Or on that twisted tale of Korgan and Ellesime that sprang to my mind when I was reading about Gimli's thing for Galadriel in LOTR.

That's what I should be doing…but screw it; my muse is on six-week vacation, it seems.

Instead of writing, I've been reading quite a bit lately. A lot of published books, to be sure, but also a LOT of Attic stuff. I've been reading things I haven't followed too closely in current quizzes and browsing the archives a bit.

And yes, I'll say there's a lot of great stuff in the Attic—stories that prove that fanfic does not have to suck.

But there is quite a bit that I find very flawed. And more often than I'd like—though far, far less than I might fear if I were to go to any random ol' fanfic site—I find myself thinking, “THAT is the definition of craptacular.”

And even some of the really good stuff has what I see as weak spots.

I can think of quite a few general comments on the sort of thing I feel it's just a bad thing to do. I might even have enough to make a small list. This will just deal with general beefs—hopefully not in a way that is overly abrasive, and CERTAINLY not in a way that mentions any one story or series by name or by obvious unique traits.

What good will this do? you may ask. Aren't I basically proposing a massive bitching session?

Not exactly. It's my hope that people will read this list and start looking at their own writing with a critical eye that might be immune to their usual writing blindspots (Every writer has blindspots, IMO. I'm sure I've got 'em; I just can't see 'em since they are BLINDspots.), to start asking themselves questions, like, “Gee, in following this detail from the game am I actually ignoring all real-world, non-gamey logic? Does that bother me? What can I do about it?”

But I'm just one voice, at times perhaps more obnoxious than most, but one voice nonetheless. I don't think that anyone would necessarily benefit that greatly just from whatever insight one voice can provide. So this list I'm proposing is a writer's resource I want people to feel free to add to. Open to all.

It will be a list of subjective opinions, perhaps even contradictory opinions, but that's alright; it obviously isn't meant to be a set of hard and fast rules (because often things boil down to a good old-fashioned difference of opinions), just some things that everyone might want to at least consider as they're writing.

So, to sum up: I propose a thread that will be an open list of general writing tips, particularly of traps that people fall into, for writers to keep in mind.

For example…

Sometimes writers—even professional writers—will include a character in a story that I feel is uninteresting and detracts from the quality. Commonly known as a Mary Sue, this type of character often comes across as too-perfect (good-looking, smart, talented, powerful, and all-around better than everyone else—without ever having to sacrifice anything to achieve these things) with no real flaws. Every other character is often madly in love with the Mary Sue, and he/she tends to be an author's idealized self-image.

Note that it would not be OK to start calling an Attic author's character a Mary Sue. In a case where you feel the need to give an example, please refer only 'real' books/stories (i.e. works of professional writers—anything that can be found in a bookstore is fair game).

I have a lot more to say than the universal “Mary Sues=bad” rule, a lot of which is pretty much BG-specific, and I'm hoping I'm not the only one. I am eager to start, but I thought I should ask the opinions of fellow Attic-goers. Would there be a problem with this if it were done in a civil manner that didn't single anyone out, but just addressed general 'problems'? Or does it sound like a divisive, unhelpful thing that I should just forget about?

Hope this whole thing made sense instead of coming across as a series of disjointed ramblings. Opinions on this would be most welcome.



#2 Guest_Nyx_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 08:36 AM

Well, I'm all for it. :)

But I'll go a step further and wonder... while doing all this reading, why not tell the authors directly (but politely)? Seriously, if you're reading my stuff and thinking "THAT is the definition of craptacular.” then I want to know why. :) If you think that I'm writing Mary Sues, I want to know that too. :)

I'd rather have you respond to a story or email me or whatever and say "Nyx, your work is craptacular and here's why:" (followed by a reasonably stated list of flaws) than sit there trying to puzzle out whether or not the suggestion to use fewer adjectives is a concern in my stories.

But anyway, going back to the list of general suggestions idea, I say yes! I'd gladly contribute; contradictory opinions are a great idea as well. Yeah!

-Nyx


Parallel Journeys - Nyx's Archive And St

#3 Guest_zan_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 09:11 AM

> Note: Before I start, I will say that everything I write is IMHO and not

> meant to offend anyone. I'm trying not to sound preachy or anything, but

> it is possible I'll come across that way if I go ahead with the plan I

> detail below. I shouldn't be writing this.

now, don't shoot yourself in the foot before you begin :)

personally, i think your suggestions were more than valid. part of me agrees with nyx, and says "why not tell the authors themselves?". it would be sort of an extension of the critique threads that proliferated here about a year ago, though with a bit more substance to them. not on the level of critters, etc, of course, but simply with an eye to pointing out flaws as well as virtues. i know that i personally would welcome such criticism; when people read my work and think "bleurgh", i'd really like to know why, so I can fix it :) or if they just notice some stylistic flaws, or plotholes, again i'd love to know.

however :)

i realise that not everyone feels the same way. as the blurb at the top says, some are thicker-skinned than others, and some are happy with the way their writing is. that was why the old critique threads never took off - the sheer amount of time one needed to invest, and the nagging suspicion that one's comments might not be well-received.

so i rather like the idea of your thread, a more indirect version. the only problem i can see is that people might take some comments as personal attacks, even when they weren't intended as such. i admit, i'm all for honesty and directness...but, if that isn't possible within board dynamics, your suggestion is a good second best.

> I have a lot more to say than the universal “Mary Sues=bad” rule, a lot of

> which is pretty much BG-specific, and I'm hoping I'm not the only one. I

> am eager to start, but I thought I should ask the opinions of fellow

> Attic-goers. Would there be a problem with this if it were done in a civil

> manner that didn't single anyone out, but just addressed general

> 'problems'? Or does it sound like a divisive, unhelpful thing that I

> should just forget about?

i don't believe it is divisive. as i say, my only concern is that it might foster underground hostility...people wondering "is he/she attacking me?", because the statements aren't overt. i would not think that myself, but i can imagine that people might - i know from experience that i have unintentionally offended people in debates here, simply through the way i express things. people are different, and react to things in different ways.

however, in place of anything else, i like your idea, and would be more than willing to read it, act on suggestions, and hopefully contribute :)

zan

and i agree entirely about mary-sues :)


#4 Guest_Ophidia_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 12:00 PM

I have to say that I'm afraid I don't agree. While, yes, we all have various points we need to work on to improve, I don't think it is even remotely possible to make a list of pitfalls for us all to avoid. Writing simply doesn't work like that. There are no golden rules for writing, no one formula that works. I have, for instance, read stories with clear Mary-Sues in them that are still enjoyable to read. It is possible to write a likable Mary-Sue, though I don't think I'd ever want to try!

I like receiving constructive criticism, but I think that one has to be wary of following all the advice thrown at you, as a writer. Sometimes I agree with the various things people say, and I make alterations. At other times, I don't, and I leave things alone.

Perhaps a lot of imperfections in our story telling technique would be ironed out with a list of things to avoid, but I believe that a perfectly written story is also a boring one. If a story is preened too much, it loses its immediacy and punch. Perhaps it is even the imperfections that make a story work!


Glorious Train Wrecks

#5 Guest_Anonymous_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 12:24 PM

> Sometimes writers—even professional writers—will include a character in a

> story that I feel is uninteresting and detracts from the quality. Commonly

> known as a Mary Sue, this type of character often comes across as

> too-perfect (good-looking, smart, talented, powerful, and all-around

> better than everyone else—without ever having to sacrifice anything to

> achieve these things) with no real flaws. Every other character is often

> madly in love with the Mary Sue, and he/she tends to be an author's

> idealized self-image. Note that it would not be OK to start calling an

> Attic author's character a Mary Sue. In a case where you feel the need to

> give an example, please refer only 'real' books/stories (i.e. works of

> professional writers—anything that can be found in a bookstore is fair

> game).

I'Ll call Drizzt Mary Sue from now on.


#6 Guest_Domi_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 12:51 PM

1) A lot of authors here already put "I am so nervious to post it..." tag on their stories and this is a very friendly place - do you want them to refuse to post at all? FEELINGS OF A LIVING PERSON ARE HUNDRED TIMES MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

2) BG LENDS itself to MS-types, and that IS a legitimate case of using MS, PC is in many cases an alter-ego and is a demi-god

3) A perefectly good way to critisize is to stay silent and not to respond to the post

4) What one might not like another person might enjoy greatly

5) I do not think anyone is blind to their own faults, because everyone can read and compare the stories and learn from each other and each others mistakes. If one cannot notice his/her own problem, one most likely would ignore it/become defensive if it is brought to his/her attention by another

6) The goal here is to have fun, not to become a writer, even if some people here are quite capable of doing stories way better than "professional".



#7 Laufey

Posted 05 November 2002 - 02:39 PM

You make some good points, but I see problems with the suggestion as well. First, I fear that some prospective beginning writers might be scared away by such a list, and feel they weren't good enough to try. Also, as Ophidia said, I don't think there is a perfect way of writing. Different people use different methods, and different methods can all produce good stories.

Personally, I highly recommend using the beta reader system. I've done beta reading myself, and have my own short stories beta read before posting, and many times my beta reader has been able to help me see things in a new light. Also, when I beta read for somebody else I tend to be more specific and detailed than when doing general commentary, more ambitious if you will.

I also think it is important to remember to A) listen to and think about the criticism you recieve, and :) Use it or lose it depending on what *you* think. Sometimes suggestions I get make me change things about my stories, sometimes they don't, but as long as they're constructive they're always welcome.

Just my two cents. :)


In The Cards
Rogues do it from behind.

#8 Guest_Silver_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 03:26 PM

> Hope this whole thing made sense instead of coming across as a series of

> disjointed ramblings. Opinions on this would be most welcome.

I don't like the idea. If I'm honest, you've made me very nervous about posting my work now and I don't like feeling like this. I don't mind constructive critcism, in fact I like receiving it, but I'd much rather that people told me what was wrong with my stories upfront (either by response or email) so I can take another look at it and decide whether or not to make changes. Writing is supposed to be fun and people learn as they go along. I only post on this board because, like Domi said, it is a friendly place and I really don't think your idea would help matters much.

Silver



#9 Guest_Nyx_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 03:46 PM

> I don't like the idea. If I'm honest, you've made me very nervous about

> posting my work now and I don't like feeling like this. I don't mind

> constructive critcism, in fact I like receiving it, but I'd much rather

> that people told me what was wrong with my stories upfront (either by

> response or email) so I can take another look at it and decide whether or

> not to make changes.

Hehe, honestly, that's what I was thinking; that I'd rather hear it directly than wonder about whether or not people are talking about me. It's not making me nervous exactly, but I detest not knowing what I'm doing wrong (whether it's actually wrong or just an opinion, either way I'd like to know what people are thinking.)

-Nyx


Parallel Journeys - Nyx's Archive And St

#10 Weyoun

Posted 05 November 2002 - 04:22 PM

> Note: Before I start, I will say that everything I write is IMHO and not

> meant to offend anyone. I'm trying not to sound preachy or anything, but

> it is possible I'll come across that way if I go ahead with the plan I

> detail below. I shouldn't be writing this.

> I should be working on DoB. Or on the half-finished story I was writing

> for last quiz. Or on that twisted tale of Korgan and Ellesime that sprang

> to my mind when I was reading about Gimli's thing for Galadriel in LOTR.

> That's what I should be doing…but screw it; my muse is on six-week

> vacation, it seems.

> Instead of writing, I've been reading quite a bit lately. A lot of

> published books, to be sure, but also a LOT of Attic stuff. I've been

> reading things I haven't followed too closely in current quizzes and

> browsing the archives a bit.

> And yes, I'll say there's a lot of great stuff in the Attic—stories that

> prove that fanfic does not have to suck.

> But there is quite a bit that I find very flawed. And more often than I'd

> like—though far, far less than I might fear if I were to go to any random

> ol' fanfic site—I find myself thinking, “THAT is the definition of

> craptacular.”

Okay, my opinion. I don't agree.

First of all, you are making two assumptions here.

1. You are implying that your definition of 'craptacular' is the only valid one, and I have problems with that. It's a subjectivity-thing for me, and 'craptacular' is a different thing. Different people see a different meaning in such a term, just like in the term 'better story'. I don't believe in objective views, so imo, there is no objective, 'perfect story', since the very definition of perfect story is different for everyone. Which leads to :

2. You assume flaws and blindspots are wrong things. Again, that is a matter of opinion. One story might outrage one, but endear the other. One reader will stumble over a flaw, another will see it as the heart of the story. I side with Ophidia on this point... removing flaws might suck the fun right out of a story.

Take Star Trek for example. If one writer makes a mistake with underlying physics of atoms or whatknot, the physicist viewer might have a serious problem with it, while someone else (even other physicists) won't care about it, and might find fault on another level entirely. Reading and opinion-forming is subjective, after all.

> Sometimes writers—even professional writers—will include a character in a

> story that I feel is uninteresting and detracts from the quality. Commonly

> known as a Mary Sue, this type of character often comes across as

> too-perfect (good-looking, smart, talented, powerful, and all-around

> better than everyone else—without ever having to sacrifice anything to

> achieve these things) with no real flaws. Every other character is often

> madly in love with the Mary Sue, and he/she tends to be an author's

> idealized self-image. Note that it would not be OK to start calling an

> Attic author's character a Mary Sue. In a case where you feel the need to

> give an example, please refer only 'real' books/stories (i.e. works of

> professional writers—anything that can be found in a bookstore is fair

> game).

> I have a lot more to say than the universal “Mary Sues=bad” rule, a lot of

> which is pretty much BG-specific, and I'm hoping I'm not the only one.

Why is Mary Suism bad? It doesn't necessarily have to be, if handled well. I don't particularly like Mary Suism, but I'm not opposed to it. Again, it's all in the Eye of the Beholder.

> I

> am eager to start, but I thought I should ask the opinions of fellow

> Attic-goers. Would there be a problem with this if it were done in a civil

> manner that didn't single anyone out, but just addressed general

> 'problems'? Or does it sound like a divisive, unhelpful thing that I

> should just forget about?

Well, there's that subjective thing again. One person might appreciate it, another would not and might even be hurt by the criticism. As a rule, it's best not to give criticism if not specifically asked for it. I don't mind it myself...

Note that I don't believe criticism should be taken to heart without question. It's an opinion, after all, and a writer has to think long and hard what he or she does with the offered critiques. No offence, but I think your proposal might do more harm than good...

Well, that's my, naturally subjective, opinion on it. :)

---Weyoun


TnT Enhanced Edition: http://www.fanfictio...rds-and-Tempers

---
Sith Warrior - Master, I can sense your anger.

Darth Baras - A blind, comotose lobotomy-patient could sense my anger!

---

"The New Age? It's just the old age stuck in a microwave oven for fifteen seconds" - James Randi

#11 Guest_Jaimevelasco_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 05:16 PM

This is a friendly place. But hey, the soul of this is writing, and I guess everybody would like to know what are their most common mistakes (I do)

After all, those mistakes you would like to pint out, are not the official attic set or rules. They are made just for helping others.

Personally, I would like to see those rules. And I'll agree I have to take care of my own Mary-Suenism.


#12 Guest_Anonymous_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 05:47 PM

> I'Ll call Drizzt Mary Sue from now on.

LOL, I think you just became my new best friend. The funny thing is, I read the original post this morning, and Drizzt was the first thing to pop in my head!


#13 Guest_Anonymous_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 06:13 PM

> 3) A perefectly good way to critisize is to stay silent and not to respond

> to the post

That is scary, Domi...

> 4) What one might not like another person might enjoy greatly

> 5) I do not think anyone is blind to their own faults, because everyone

> can read and compare the stories and learn from each other and each others

> mistakes. If one cannot notice his/her own problem, one most likely would

> ignore it/become defensive if it is brought to his/her attention by

> another

But that is very very true...



#14 Guest_zan_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 06:15 PM

> 2. You assume flaws and blindspots are wrong things. Again, that is a

> matter of opinion. One story might outrage one, but endear the other. One

> reader will stumble over a flaw, another will see it as the heart of the

> story. I side with Ophidia on this point... removing flaws might suck the

> fun right out of a story.

i was assuming that Joe meant flaws more as "generally undesirable traits in writing". yes, this is an extremely vague area, and more books have been written about it than any man would have time to read :) but there are certain things that are widely acknowledged as detracting from the story. extreme head-hopping, for example. or poor sentence structure, or repetitive description, or stilted dialogue.

of course, there are always exceptions - eg, stilted dialogue might be desired within a certain dramatic context. i'm not saying such things can never work - just that one should know the rules before bending or breaking them. think of picasso :)

also: i entirely agree that opinions are subjective. however, i think everyone here would instinctively be able to recognise the difference between good writing, and not so good. the line between may be vague to the point of non-existence - but some things are definitely in one camp or the other.

> Take Star Trek for example. If one writer makes a mistake with underlying

> physics of atoms or whatknot, the physicist viewer might have a serious

> problem with it, while someone else (even other physicists) won't care

> about it, and might find fault on another level entirely. Reading and

> opinion-forming is subjective, after all.

just to say, that's rather a different matter - to do with hard facts as opposed to the more general area of writing. i don't know a thing about physics, and were i to watch star trek ignorance would probably be bliss :) the same as, when i read a book described as an "epic", i bristle (the literary definition being a narrative poem, which i can safely say does not describe any book currently in publication :P). it's a matter of hard facts and definitions; things that do not really come into play for advice on good writing.

> Why is Mary Suism bad? It doesn't necessarily have to be, if handled well.

> I don't particularly like Mary Suism, but I'm not opposed to it. Again,

> it's all in the Eye of the Beholder.

the problem is, Mary Sueism is notoriously HARD to handle well. Having read various permutations of Sue, in both fan and original (published!) fiction, I have to say that even the best of writers would struggle not to fall into at least one of the traps associated with MSing. A Mary-Sue is simply too close to the author for them to treat rationally. this, of course, is just my opinion: but i think it's important to maintain a bit of distance between yourself and the characters. An author might think their character is the greatest person in the world, due to their emotional investment - but if they can't convince the reader of that, their feelings don't matter a jot.

> Well, there's that subjective thing again. One person might appreciate it,

> another would not and might even be hurt by the criticism. As a rule, it's

> best not to give criticism if not specifically asked for it. I don't mind

> it myself...

i agree that criticism is best given directly - but as you say, it's hard to know who wants it or not. hence the critique system never really took hold last time - no-one ever knew how to angle their criticisms, or whether they'd be appreciated. if a separate thread would allow people to air their own opinions of what "good writing" entails, i'm in favour of it - but as i said, i do recognise the potential to cause discord, simply because of the lack of openness.

hmm. that was long. honestly, i could ramble for england sometimes :)

zan


#15 Guest_zan_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 06:23 PM

just a few comments here, your reply intrigued me :) (and, you know, i like the sound of my own voice :))

> 2) BG LENDS itself to MS-types, and that IS a legitimate case of using MS,

> PC is in many cases an alter-ego and is a demi-god

and this is a problem of the game. BG does lend itself to MS...but the question here is not whether MSing is legitimate, but whether it's enjoyable for the reader. that, in the end, is key. if someone can write a believeable and entertaining MS, good luck to them (lord knows I don't have the skill :)). but the key is in the reader response, not any question of legitimacy. people, after all, can write whatever they like :)

> 3) A perefectly good way to critisize is to stay silent and not to respond

> to the post

i disagree here. that approach seems rather dishonest - and some might take it as a personal slight (eg: "XYZ is ignoring me, he/she/it must dislike me"). my opinion (and nothing more :P) is that it is far better to be open and honest, and so avoid any misunderstanding. just because i dislike someone's work, does not mean i dislike the person themselves - and, though i don't dislike anyone here, i hope the same would be true in reverse :)

> 5) I do not think anyone is blind to their own faults, because everyone

> can read and compare the stories and learn from each other and each others

> mistakes. If one cannot notice his/her own problem, one most likely would

> ignore it/become defensive if it is brought to his/her attention by

> another

i can only speak for myself here, and say that i am more than happy for people to point out flaws, because if i'm not aware of them i would rather be MADE so, than carry on unawares. but i acknowledge that is a personal opinion, and not everyone feels the same.

> 6) The goal here is to have fun, not to become a writer, even if some

> people here are quite capable of doing stories way better than

> "professional".

i agree, the goal here is to have fun. but some will find their fun in improving. a bit like if a person plays football at the weekend, or goes surfing, or likes to play the oboe. all are hobbies, not careers, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't like to be better at them :)

again, though, this may be different for other people, and those differences ought to be respected.

zan


#16 Guest_Anonymous_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 07:08 PM

Writing styles differ, as people differ.

Now, would you say that writing an entire novel in a single phrase is a writing no-no? Or that writing a whole book in sentences that end in suspension points is one? Because Garcia Marques did one thing and Celine did the other... Dostoievski introduces his characters in annoying detail while Kafka provides very little background if any at all.

Drizzt is a hugely popular character, and he is the most Mary Sue of all Mary Sues ever known to man or beast...

The point I'm trying to make is that a list of literary no-nos is not only not necessary, but that one cannot be devised, because there is no such thing as a literary no-no.

See? I'm already getting defensive :)



#17 Guest_Anonymous_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 07:20 PM

> just a few comments here, your reply intrigued me :) (and, you know, i

> like the sound of my own voice :))

Mee too, mee too! LOL.

> i disagree here. that approach seems rather dishonest - and some might

> take it as a personal slight (eg: "XYZ is ignoring me, he/she/it must

> dislike me"). my opinion (and nothing more :)) is that it is far

> better to be open and honest, and so avoid any misunderstanding. just

> because i dislike someone's work, does not mean i dislike the person

> themselves - and, though i don't dislike anyone here, i hope the same

> would be true in reverse :(

I just needed to say something about this. There is no need to get personal, LOL, and the commenting thingy IMHO isn't a 'scratch my back and I'll scratch yours' type-o-business. As we don't really know each other personally, I doubt anyone would take the not commenting as a dangerous insult...

And I for one have found myself not commenting on stories I liked a lot, well, because there was nothing more to say and I am very seldom given to praise (although it's been known to happen now and then, LOL). The lack of comment to a story therefore does not (and should not *angry growl*) imply that the story is bad or that it is disliked.

Everyone with courage enough to post, weather thick skinned or not,is giving a piece of themselfs, and they should receive a big cheer rather than wait breathlessly for someone else to validate their work. Or so methinks.


#18 Weyoun

Posted 05 November 2002 - 07:22 PM

> i was assuming that Joe meant flaws more as "generally undesirable

> traits in writing". yes, this is an extremely vague area, and more

> books have been written about it than any man would have time to read :)

> but there are certain things that are widely acknowledged as detracting

> from the story. extreme head-hopping, for example. or poor sentence

> structure, or repetitive description, or stilted dialogue.

Perhaps so, but I'd have to strain to think when I last saw an example of either these elements you've mentioned, so my formation of the term 'flaw' with Joe G. presented never really took those in accounts. I wasn't thinking of grammar/technical matters, but more of narrative and story-internal matters. (I'm sorry if my own definitions are a bit vague here. I don't know many english literary terms, I'm afraid...)

> also: i entirely agree that opinions are subjective. however, i think

> everyone here would instinctively be able to recognise the difference

> between good writing, and not so good. the line between may be vague to

> the point of non-existence - but some things are definitely in one camp or

> the other.

Perhaps, but what one considers good writing might not be considered good writing to another person and vice-versa. These matters are so personal to the reader that I think it would be virtually impossible to divide in camps, as you put it. Plus some are more forgiving about not so good writing than others... I think it's all too vague and subjective to call...

> just to say, that's rather a different matter - to do with hard facts as

> opposed to the more general area of writing. i don't know a thing about

> physics, and were i to watch star trek ignorance would probably be bliss

> :) the same as, when i read a book described as an "epic", i

> bristle (the literary definition being a narrative poem, which i can

> safely say does not describe any book currently in publication :)). it's a

> matter of hard facts and definitions; things that do not really come into

> play for advice on good writing.

That's not what I meant, it's more like an example. My point was, what might irk one person, would not even bother the next. And a third person might find fault in something which the first two never noticed. I've only used the Star Trek physics as an example because I was reading a book about it just now. :)

> the problem is, Mary Sueism is notoriously HARD to handle well. Having

> read various permutations of Sue, in both fan and original (published!)

> fiction, I have to say that even the best of writers would struggle not to

> fall into at least one of the traps associated with MSing. A Mary-Sue is

> simply too close to the author for them to treat rationally. this, of

> course, is just my opinion: but i think it's important to maintain a bit

> of distance between yourself and the characters. An author might think

> their character is the greatest person in the world, due to their

> emotional investment - but if they can't convince the reader of that,

> their feelings don't matter a jot.

I don't think it's as important to maintain a bit of distance between yourself and your characters and writings, as long as a writer has the willpower to remain critical enough to avoud arrogance. I love Laska to death and I feel very close to her. I put a lot of myself in my writings all the time, but I definitely don't think Laska is the greatest person in the world... far from it... :( Nor do I think Tnt is the greatest story in the world. Self-doubt can be very healthy in these cases. :D I feel very connected to my writing and my characters, but that's just my way, I suppose.

> i agree that criticism is best given directly - but as you say, it's hard

> to know who wants it or not. hence the critique system never really took

> hold last time - no-one ever knew how to angle their criticisms, or

> whether they'd be appreciated. if a separate thread would allow people to

> air their own opinions of what "good writing" entails, i'm in

> favour of it - but as i said, i do recognise the potential to cause

> discord, simply because of the lack of openness.

I agree with Laufey on her point : That such a thread might scare away new writers.

We're not here to write for profit but for fun. Perhaps I'm simply too chaotic a personality but as soon as someone puts up a thread like a 'good writing', I'd grow suspiscious of that. Everyone needs to make up their own mind of what good writing is, and I'm afraid such a thread would be used as a guide-line for writing stories at the Attic, and, to be honest, I think there importance in differences.

I might be worried that people think stories which do not fall within the thread are not to be posted at the attic. I really think a 'good writing'-thread is a very, very, very bad idea.

> hmm. that was long. honestly, i could ramble for england sometimes :(

LOL! That's okay, it's an important discussion.

---Weyoun

TnT Enhanced Edition: http://www.fanfictio...rds-and-Tempers

---
Sith Warrior - Master, I can sense your anger.

Darth Baras - A blind, comotose lobotomy-patient could sense my anger!

---

"The New Age? It's just the old age stuck in a microwave oven for fifteen seconds" - James Randi

#19 Guest_Nyx_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 07:33 PM

> And I for one have found myself not commenting on stories I liked a lot,

> well, because there was nothing more to say and I am very seldom given to

> praise (although it's been known to happen now and then, LOL). The lack of

> comment to a story therefore does not (and should not *angry growl*) imply

> that the story is bad or that it is disliked.

That's one of the things that distressed me about the idea that one votes by not commenting; how does the writer know whether the lack of feedback means "wow, your work is good but I have nothing to say" or "that was so bad that I'd better keep my mouth shut"? I've done the no comments on great work thing too, you know? Sometimes I just don't have any words.

> Everyone with courage enough to post, weather thick skinned or not,is

> giving a piece of themselfs, and they should receive a big cheer rather

> than wait breathlessly for someone else to validate their work. Or so

> methinks.

Easier said than done, methinks. :) At least sometimes!

-Nyx


Parallel Journeys - Nyx's Archive And St

#20 Guest_zan_*

Posted 05 November 2002 - 07:43 PM

> Perhaps so, but I'd have to strain to think when I last saw an example of

> either these elements you've mentioned, so my formation of the term 'flaw'

> with Joe G. presented never really took those in accounts. I wasn't

> thinking of grammar/technical matters, but more of narrative and

> story-internal matters. (I'm sorry if my own definitions are a bit vague

> here. I don't know many english literary terms, I'm afraid...)

well...perhaps i didn't make myself quite clear. i don't think it's valid to criticise the content of a writer's story, so much as its execution. an idea is an idea, whether the reader agrees with it or not :) eg, to use the example for which i fear i am famed, i may not like evil aerie - but that doesn't mean i think stories involving her are by default bad. depends on how the person writes it. if someone comes up with an interesting idea or concept, which is then poorly executed...well, it seems a shame, when they've clearly got an inventive and imaginative mind.

there are certain established rules of "good writing" - grammatical and technical matters, as you said. everything else is opinion.

> Perhaps, but what one considers good writing might not be considered good

> writing to another person and vice-versa. These matters are so personal to

> the reader that I think it would be virtually impossible to divide in

> camps, as you put it. Plus some are more forgiving about not so good

> writing than others... I think it's all too vague and subjective to

> call...

well. i think we can agree opposite ends of the spectrum, at least? but yes, i agree, people have different degrees of tolerance. it is a hard thing to define, and for that reason i'll drop it :( after all, i suspect it's instinctual, and hence very difficult to make a case for.

> That's not what I meant, it's more like an example. My point was, what

> might irk one person, would not even bother the next. And a third person

> might find fault in something which the first two never noticed. I've only

> used the Star Trek physics as an example because I was reading a book

> about it just now. :(

ah, but in that case, wouldn't the author benefit from all these different views? because, as you say yourself, people notice different things...and so the author themself might be ignorant of something which irks a subset of their readers. the author is never under any obligation to *act* on such criticism; that is entirely their decision, and i don't think anyone ever suggested otherwise. think of it as a pick and mix...the author looks at suggestions, then thinks "well, fair point", or "no, i disagree". then they can alter their story (or not) as they see fit.

> I don't think it's as important to maintain a bit of distance between

> yourself and your characters and writings, as long as a writer has the

> willpower to remain critical enough to avoud arrogance. I love Laska to

> death and I feel very close to her. I put a lot of myself in my writings

> all the time, but I definitely don't think Laska is the greatest person in

> the world... far from it... :D Nor do I think Tnt is the greatest story in

> the world. Self-doubt can be very healthy in these cases. :D I feel very

> connected to my writing and my characters, but that's just my way, I

> suppose.

i didn't mean to say that no-one should feel a connection with their characters - rather hard to write them if you don't :) but there is a difference between feeling a connection, and believing a character is utterly perfect in every way. as you said, you don't count Laska as perfect - and there lies your own bit of "distance" :)

The other major problem with Mary Sues is this: because they are so very very close to the author's own beliefs and personality, any criticism of the character tends to be interpreted as a personal attack. that's not really the author's fault...i suppose it's an inevitable consequence of self-insertion. not many people like to be told their personality is flawed :)

> We're not here to write for profit but for fun. Perhaps I'm simply too

> chaotic a personality but as soon as someone puts up a thread like a 'good

> writing', I'd grow suspiscious of that. Everyone needs to make up their

> own mind of what good writing is, and I'm afraid such a thread would be

> used as a guide-line for writing stories at the Attic, and, to be honest,

> I think there importance in differences.

i wouldn't call it "chaotic", as such. not even rebellious...because that implies something to rebel *against*. such a thread would by no means be compulsory reading, after all - if someone didn't want to read it, they could just not click on it :) it would simply be there for those who were interested in the content. and, as Joe G made clear, the content would be entirely subjective - one person might think one thing, and another might contradict them entirely. it's up to the reader to draw benefits from such diverse opinions, and edit out those they disagree with.

and diversity is the key, here :) I don't think Joe was proposing a hard and fast set of rules, or some dominant clique deciding what is and what isn't correct. that's why there would be nothing to be suspicious or rebellious towards - it would simply be a diverse collection of opinions, which one could chose to read or ignore at one's own leisure :)

> I might be worried that people think stories which do not fall within the

> thread are not to be posted at the attic. I really think a 'good

> writing'-thread is a very, very, very bad idea.

as i said, no-one would be forced to read such a thread, lol :D and how *could* a story fall within the thread? everyone has a different view, and i don't think a story exists that could possible please everyone. i'd be rather afraid if it did.

zan





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Skin Designed By Evanescence at IBSkin.com