When you show your writing to someone for the first time, tell them you don’t want criticism right away. Tell them to tell you what works first, tell them to find ten places that they loved, that surprised them, that stayed with them.

What a fab piece of advice. Not that I've followed it. In fact years ago, after a number of negative lessons, I asked my first writing tutor (a mum-lit author who tutored me in the early days) 'Please tell me at least one thing I do right' and she couldn't.

I wish I'd asked her that during our first lesson because, although my writing was in its infancy, there must have been something, no matter how small, that I did well. A question like that would have shown she wasn't right for me.

I didn't write for a year after a few lessons with her.

Anyhow, to get to the point. I liked these five writing tips. Not all will resonate, but they're a bit different to the usual 'Write every day, keep writing, keep writing some more...'.


http://www.novelicious.com/2013/07/rosanna-leys-top-five-writing-tips-.html

I think that's so true - and what a great link. Many thanks for that, Sharley. I can feel a blogpost coming on.

It's one of the things that angers me most about the tiresome, macho conviction/assertion that if feedback ain't hurting, it ain't working. C'mon, c'mon, I can take it. Bet you can't knock me down...

It's not only tiresome, it's profoundly arrogant to assume that you always know in your own work what works well on your readers, so you don't need telling. That you are, in other words, "right" about your writing. You won't always know, and you aren't always right. You may be right for yourself, as your own first reader, but that's a pretty futile kind of right if it doesn't communicate to others in the way you meant it to.

Having someone tell you, specifically, what in your writing works on them, is just as useful as them telling you what doesn't.

And because all writers need to feel that it's worth it, it's far, far better feedback practice to start with the things that are about what makes this writing - and therefore this writer - worth it. Then you move on to what's undermining it, which is just as important, obviously.

It's all only any use if it's specifics, obviously. A bland "this is wonderful" is no use, except in the implied, "It was/is worth the effort." A bland "this is crap" is even less use, because it gives you no more information, and says it wasn't worth it.

Edited by EmmaD at 14:08:00 on 06 July 2013


Edited by EmmaD at 14:09:00 on 06 July 2013

I like the one about putting animals in your work. That's very interesting, and I think she's right - it would change things and reveal different aspects of character.

I think the only animals I've ever written were several dogs that got graphically tortured to death. Somehow, I don't think that's the sort of thing she means.

I disagree with her that positive feedback is vastly more useful than negative. Both types are important.

I think positive feedback is what draws you onwards as a writer to feel, as Emma says "what makes this writing - and therefore this writer - worth it".

Without the positive, the negative is just a form of suffocation, snuffing out the desire to write. Why would anyone want to write if they are told their writing is rubbish and has no redeeming features?

Therefore, to me, the positive is more important. It is the placeholder that you can grip onto and remember, while the negative but constructive feedback is given. However, as you both note, both positive and 'constructive' negative feedback are required to help a writer progress.



And, Catkin! Torturing animals? I just can't do it, not even to an imaginary insect. No. Nooooo. How could you?

Edited by Sharley at 15:22:00 on 06 July 2013

several dogs that got graphically tortured to death. Somehow, I don't think that's the sort of thing she means.

Oh, I think it can be. Her exact words are:

"Animals change everything, and reveal human character in ways you might not expect."

What could be more telling than someone who tortures animals (taken that this relates to unnecessary brutality and not self-preservation, or killing for food), but is otherwise apparently normal?

So, yes, it's a good point.

IMO, the absolute worst that someone can say is "it's nice". I would prefer to be told my writing is utter crap. At least that fires me up.
Yes, I don't agree with her on that point, either. All sincere criticism is useful.

Hmm. I don't know - I think I do have a decent grasp of what works, most of the time, and maybe it's just the masochist in me, but I want to home in on the not-working stuff right away. Trouble starts, of course, when everyone you ask comes up with something different!

And 'add more characters?' Really? Personally, I'd want to look at my existing ones first, I think, otherwise the danger is that you'll end up with a cast of walking, talking plot devices.

But yes, very interesting - thanks for posting this.

I don't think she's saying that criticism is not useful, just that it's best to get criticism from people who like your work or, at the very least, understand what you are trying to do. I can't disagree with that. What is the point of criticism from someone who doesn't have a good opinion of your writing?

I did raise my eyebrows about adding characters, but point 4 resonated and still does.

Edited by Sharley at 18:29:00 on 06 July 2013

Yes, it's vital to take criticism only from people who understand what you are trying to do. About the value of positive feedback ... maybe it's much more important at the beginning and in the middle of a writer's development, and the most important thing at the very beginning?

And, Catkin! Torturing animals? I just can't do it, not even to an imaginary insect. No. Nooooo. How could you?

I had that story up on one of the groups here, and several people said that they found it very hard to read. Actually ... I really enjoyed writing those scenes. I was sitting there feeling pleasantly evil, and thinking, "Oooh yes, that's seriously nasty. That will upset people." Don't quite know what that says about me. They were easier to write than the rape of a 13-year-old girl in the same story. I found that quite hard to do, because I didn't really want to let her get actually raped; I wanted it to be an attempted rape, but in the end a full rape was the right thing for the story. Still don't like the fact that I did that to her, though, as I was very fond of her.

I did kill a dog in my novel - didn't enjoy it, though. But as part of the rewrite, I have a feeling a couple of chickens are going to bite the dust! *evil grin*

I have a feeling a couple of chickens are going to bite the dust! *evil grin*

NOOOOOOOOOO!