ParanetOnline
McAnally's (The Community Pub) => Author Craft => Topic started by: LizW65 on January 20, 2009, 11:11:10 PM
-
Apparently, a SF writer has threatened the life of an anthology editor/critic over a bad review:
http://docbrite.livejournal.com/656896.html
Kids, do NOT try this at home.
-
Really? The logic behind that guy just makes me go huh?
And on a completely unrelated tangent...kitty in a subwoofer!!
-
Way to obliterate any possibility of having a writing career in one easy move.
-
at least he won't get anymore bad reviews...since he will have no more books
-
He said he was in it for the art. lol.
Honestly the best advice I got from my art professor in college was to to expect and treasure criticism you received. Criticism is far more valuable than praise in most cases.
-
If you're in it for the art of it, then you have no reason to be getting your work published.
-
If you're in it for the art of it, then you have no reason to be getting your work published.
Not hardly; you can want to get your story out to people who will appreciate it, which to my mind counts as being in it for the art, without thinking "this is a way of making money".
-
Not hardly; you can want to get your story out to people who will appreciate it, which to my mind counts as being in it for the art, without thinking "this is a way of making money".
Well, yeah, there's that, but if you're in it for the art, then shouldn't you also be willing to except that not everyone is going to view it the way you do? I don't know, the guy just seems out of it, to me.
-
That dude was just pissed off because someone agreed with what the voices in his own head tells him. I suspect it may have been his sense of taste
-
Well, yeah, there's that, but if you're in it for the art, then shouldn't you also be willing to except that not everyone is going to view it the way you do? I don't know, the guy just seems out of it, to me.
This guy is completely crazy, no argument; I just don't think being in it for the art and wanting to get published are exclusive at all.
-
To paraphrase the master: Jim Butcher
"Sometimes they (his beta readers) will make a comment that makes me really mad, but usually as I'm flying off the handle a voice in my head says "You know your only this mad because they're right." "
He went on to say he doesn't understand why anyone would volunteer to be abused by a writer.
My point in all this is, usually the criticism that hurts the most, are the ones we feel are valid. How to fix that? Apply it to your writing, and regain your confidence through self improvement... NOT through threatening the guy who pointed out your weakness.
-
There is a fine balance between criticism and pure snark though. I can't read the article from my job but you have to learn the difference between those that will speak in order to teach you a harsh lesson and those that say something just to be mean.
You also can't please everyone all the time but yes, sometimes admitting mistakes is the hardest thing to overcome. It's also what makes you the most angry because we tend to be our own harshest critics.
-
There is a fine balance between criticism and pure snark though. I can't read the article from my job but you have to learn the difference between those that will speak in order to teach you a harsh lesson and those that say something just to be mean.
You also can't please everyone all the time but yes, sometimes admitting mistakes is the hardest thing to overcome. It's also what makes you the most angry because we tend to be our own harshest critics.
Well, in this case it wasn't something I'd consider either snark or meanness; it was just a single line to the effect that the relationships didn't feel believable. Barely qualified as a review, in fact, so the guy's reaction seemed way out of proportion.
-
To paraphrase the master: Jim Butcher
"Sometimes they (his beta readers) will make a comment that makes me really mad, but usually as I'm flying off the handle a voice in my head says "You know your only this mad because they're right." "
Huh. I missed one. Where'd you find that?
-
He did fly off the handle. Yikes!
-
Huh. I missed one. Where'd you find that?
Sorry, It was a verbal quote during the Q&A at MileHiCon Oct 08, in Denver. Someone posed a question in regard to his BETA readers. He mentioned that it was full, and went on to say that he's really hard to work with, and doesn't understand WHY anyone would want the job. He also compared the job to "asking someone to point out the warts on your baby".
-
Got it. He's NOT hard to work with - he's a HELL of a lot EASIER than I actually expected, to be honest. But the bit about "asking someone to point out the warts on your baby"... yeah, that would suck. Then again, when they're removable warts, everybody's happy in the end. :D
-
Got it. He's NOT hard to work with - he's a HELL of a lot EASIER than I actually expected, to be honest. But the bit about "asking someone to point out the warts on your baby"... yeah, that would suck. Then again, when they're removable warts, everybody's happy in the end. :D
A better question, to my mind, is how critical do you think you can be with an author you like, and do you avoid telling him about any warts you've spotted?
-
A better question, to my mind, is how critical do you think you can be with an author you like, and do you avoid telling him about any warts you've spotted?
Considering the reference is about beta readers, and granted I could be wrong, but I believe that's what their job is.
-
Considering the reference is about beta readers, and granted I could be wrong, but I believe that's what their job is.
I am asking how difficult that job is.
-
I am asking how difficult that job is.
Not at all difficult. We're not there to blow sunshine up his ass; we're there to help him make sure his work is as good as possible. Starbeam had it right - it's our job. Not a privilege, not a right - it's our job. It's one we LIKE, to be sure, but we have to take it fully seriously.
-
*must mention how insanely jealous she is to hear that Shecky IS a BETA*
Lucky asterisk... ;)
-
*must mention how insanely jealous she is to hear that Shecky IS a BETA*
Hmph. Not so sure I share that. Imagine having a smaller scale version of *this board* and actually having to keep the discussion cogent, goal-directed, and within deadline. Kurding Hats.
-
Query: At what point does a professional writer such as Jim cease to take the advice of betas and just go his own route? I can understand beta readers being a useful tool for a beginning writer, but Jim has over a dozen successful books under his belt. Isn't it the job of an editor to catch errors in the text? How much say do betas actually have in the direction a story takes? Or am I completely misunderstanding their role in the creative process?
-
I can understand beta readers being a useful tool for a beginning writer, but Jim has over a dozen successful books under his belt.
I imagine there is also the issue of pacing. I mean, if you really want to wait 6+ years for Susan to come back in book 13...
-
Query: At what point does a professional writer such as Jim cease to take the advice of betas and just go his own route? I can understand beta readers being a useful tool for a beginning writer, but Jim has over a dozen successful books under his belt. Isn't it the job of an editor to catch errors in the text? How much say do betas actually have in the direction a story takes? Or am I completely misunderstanding their role in the creative process?
Why would they cease? I've heard more than one writer say something to the effect of "When you, as a writer, start to think you're really on the top of your game, that's when you REALLY start to learn." Extra sets of eyes and brains are ALWAYS good to have around - with a group of betas, you can start to get an idea of how the readership is going to react to things, something an editor just isn't as equipped to do, no matter how much experience he has. Betas have as much "say" as the writer thinks they should have; I will say that a self-honest writer will ALWAYS listen to criticism... how he responds to it, if at all, depends on a number of things, mainly whether or not it IS a good suggestion. :)
-
Query: At what point does a professional writer such as Jim cease to take the advice of betas and just go his own route? I can understand beta readers being a useful tool for a beginning writer, but Jim has over a dozen successful books under his belt. Isn't it the job of an editor to catch errors in the text? How much say do betas actually have in the direction a story takes? Or am I completely misunderstanding their role in the creative process?
It basically goes back to what JB said about them pointing out the things the writer already knows - or at least suspects - are wrong. Readers point out the writer's blind spots regarding their own works, catch continuity errors (if possible), point out passages or character moments that don't ring true, and reinforce the creeping suspicions the writer already has about his own work, etc. They aren't there to dictate plot points, rewrite sections, etc. Personally, there have been VERY few instances in which a reader of my own has pointed something out where my immediate and continued reaction is "Wow, you're just dead wrong." Usually the feedback immediately makes sense, somewhat more rarely it will make sense after I ruminate on it a few days.
I'd also like to point out something a professor of mine once said in college. The audience is NEVER WRONG, no matter what they think or say about a piece of art. Art is a subjective medium, hence, whatever the audience thinks is always correct for that particular person. Telling a person he/she is wrong about their reaction to art is . . . well, kind of foolish. What the creator has to do is weigh each individual's reaction to the art.
-
Hmph. Not so sure I share that. Imagine having a smaller scale version of *this board* and actually having to keep the discussion cogent, goal-directed, and within deadline. Kurding Hats.
I am primarily jealous of ANYONE who has extended access to Jims level of AWESOME. I met him once in person and am that much more obsessed with doing it again. *not in a creepy stalker way* *more in an "OMG you are the coolest person I've ever met! we should hang out!" kinda way*
-
Hmph. Not so sure I share that. Imagine having a smaller scale version of *this board* and actually having to keep the discussion cogent, goal-directed, and within deadline. Kurding Hats.
I think it's the fact that it IS partially a "smaller-scale version of this board" that actually makes it work so well. Discussions grow organically, and there are often aspects and issues that don't come up in restrictively managed conversations. Besides, as has been said more than once, the initial structure of the commentary IS organized; it's any further discussion that grows beyond that.
-
They aren't there to dictate plot points, rewrite sections, etc.
(snipped for space)
Oh, okay. This is mainly the part I was curious about.
-
We're not there to blow sunshine up his ass...
I would hope so...after all, what if you're blowing sunshine up the rectal aperture at the same time Jim passes gas from an all-you-can-eat bean burrito fest at Taco Bell?
The resulting combustion would leave little bits o' Butcher scattered upon the landscape :P ;D
-
Hey, even *I* know when to stop stretching a metaphor. :D
-
I would hope so...after all, what if you're blowing sunshine up the rectal aperture at the same time Jim passes gas from an all-you-can-eat bean burrito fest at Taco Bell?
The resulting combustion would leave little bits o' Butcher scattered upon the landscape :P ;D
Hey, even *I* know when to stop stretching a metaphor. :D
(*To the tune of 1-little-2-little-3-little indians*)
1-little-2-little-3-little bits o' Jim
4-little-5-little-6-little bits o' Jim
7-little-8-little-9-little bits o' Jim...
1-little-2-little-3-little bits o' Jim
-
Aren't BETAs also supposed to help catch things like Rachel/Paula and the magic car rebranding (Toyota/Buick I think)?
-
Aren't BETAs also supposed to help catch things like Rachel/Paula and the magic car rebranding (Toyota/Buick I think)?
Yes. The betas do catch things like that. Yet they somehow get ignored in publishing.
-
Yes. The betas do catch things like that. Yet they somehow get ignored in publishing.
Ive been kind of presuming that the betas' input is taken before the book goes through proofreads and copyedits, yes ? It;s amazing the things that can sneak in there; particularly for publishers who are part of larger conglomerates who assign proofreaders globally and can easily give a piece of fiction in an unusual voice a copyeditor who thinks everything should read like a New York Times editorial... trainwreck ensues.
-
Ive been kind of presuming that the betas' input is taken before the book goes through proofreads and copyedits, yes ? It;s amazing the things that can sneak in there; particularly for publishers who are part of larger conglomerates who assign proofreaders globally and can easily give a piece of fiction in an unusual voice a copyeditor who thinks everything should read like a New York Times editorial... trainwreck ensues.
Correct. Sort of the first line of defense.
And agreed on the one-standard nonsense in major corporate editing; one thing that having a tight group of informal readers is that they've come to KNOW the tones, styles and other esoterica employed by the author for particular purposes, and everything read gets critiqued in that light. "Would X really say that?" is not an unusual commentary.
... but again, Jim's Johnny-on-the-spot about most mechanical aspects of his writing, so it's not a COMMON commentary. :)
-
Has Jim had betas from the get-go, or did they come into the game later on in the series? I've sort of had the impression that the latter is true; I thought I read somewhere that he wrote the first three Dresden Files books on his own after taking a creative writing course and they were accepted by a publisher who was impressed by the fact that there already were three in the series...it was during this period that the Paula/Rachel error occurred and never got corrected. Is this right?