Constructive criticism?

[and_chocolate]

(Crossposting this to my non-RPS journal as well, because I think it applies to all genres/subgenres of slash that I write.)

I love writing. A lot of what I love about writing is taking a story that starts out inside my brain and putting it into words to share with other people, so that it ends up in their brains and, I hope, hearts. Which means that it's important to me to understand what is and is not effective about my writing.

That's where y'all come in. *g*

I know that I've got a reasonably good grasp of the mechanics of writing; I can put together a sentence with correct spelling and punctuation, a paragraph that makes sense, and a story that gets from Point A to Point B with some semblance of a plot. That said, what I don't know is what my writing is missing. There are a lot of folks out there who write with no more technical skill than me, but whose stories are highly praised.

Why? What does [insert author of your choice here]'s fiction have that mine doesn't?

What I don't want: reassurances or praise.

What I do want: people to rip my fiction apart and give me strong constructive criticism on anything -- prose style, technical skill, subject matter, etc. -- that they find lacking. Please?

Comments

[myheadgames.livejournal.com]

ok, i'm going to be honest with you here, because i often wish that people would tell me what they really think when they don't like something i've written, instead of just saying nothing. so i'm going to tell you what i really think.

i think you've got the technique of writing down, you're good at it. but the heart-bit is missing a bit, for me. i'm not saying your heart isn't in it, but... when i read your stories, i find myself thinking "this is really cleverly structured" and not... i'm not touched by it so much, usually. i wish i could be more helpful than that, but it's hard because i don't know what exactly it is that's missing. i just don't feel like i get under the skin of the characters, you know?

another problem i have with your fiction sometimes is the characterization. the orlando piece you did a while back? it's really good, the writings excellent, but i'm not buying the characterization (if you want me to explain why, i'd be happy to). and to me, that's more important. i guess that's one of the not-very-nice side affects of writing fanficition and not original fiction, people already have the characters in their head, and if the character you write don't match up with the one in the readers head, it's going to be a lot harder to get the reader on "your side" so to speak. if it was original fiction, you have a blank character to work with, which is both easier and harder in a way, i guess.

the only advice i can give you is to focus less on the structure & the mechanics of writing when you write and focus more on the story you're trying to tell. i don't know if that would help, i haven't written much so my experience is lacking at best, but that's the only thing i can think of.

and i hope you understand that i'm not saying this in a sort of "this is what you're doing wrong!"-way, i'm just trying to explain how i feel about your fic. you're more than welcome to say hey, that chick's on crack, and disregard this whole rant :)

& i know you said you didn't want reassurances, but i don't think i ever told you how much i loved your DIY series. so i'm taking the opportunity here. you should write more OB/EW. yes. :)

a long and blithery answer...

[kaneko.livejournal.com]

Hi there -- I still don't know enough about LotRiPS to know who gets praised, so I can only talk about my experience in other fandoms (due South, popslash) and the kinds of things that are received well over there. And I'm so not an expert on why some things get praised and some don't - I have no clue. I guess all I can offer you is my own reading experience of your stories.

Okay, so:

I'd never read any of your stories before. I clicked the one at the top of your memories: 'Voyeur'. And my first impression was that it was much shorter than a story I would generally read. So, I guess if you think about stories as things that compete for people's attention along with other lj entries and other stories, you kind of lost - well, my attention at least *g*, but maybe other people's as well - just because of the length alone. Which is to say, if I were to click on that link, having seen it on my friends list, I would probably see that it was very short, and close the window before reading it. It's a preference thing and short stories are absolutely not inherently 'worse' than longer stories, but I think it's a preference that quite a lot of people share.

Okay, so the next thing I did was click on 'Stop, Rewind, (re)Play' - which I saw had two parts. And the first thing I saw was this:

Warning: Might be construed by purists as having elements of song-fic, though it's really not intended that way. Also, there's some really mild bondage.

And, again, my first instinct was the close the window. Because, even though you've got 'not really intended that way', which lessens the impact of the scary 'song-fic' word, the 'song-fic' taint is there! *g*.

My advice would be to not use the word 'song-fic' in the summary. Even if it's true, you're probably going to lose a whole bunch of readers who might otherwise be interested in the story. I guess one way to think of it, is to think of the summary and the initial story post as an 'ad' for the story. It's either going to help you get readers or hinder you from getting readers.

(cont. in the next comment!)

a long and blithery answer... (part 2)

[kaneko.livejournal.com]

(cont. from previous comment).

Okay (wow, I'm blithering) -- moving on to the story itself.

I think for about the first page or so, stories (in general) are still in 'hold the reader's interest' mode. So I'm going to do a short crit of the first few paragraphs.

The loud, unforgiving buzz of Elijah's alarm cuts into his pleasant dreams and he reaches one hand out, blindly groping for the fucking snooze button in the dark and then (god-fucking-dammit) his glasses clatter off the top of the clock and onto the hardwood floor. He finally smacks the elusive button and the alarm stops its bleating, leaving him blinking in the dark, his eyes feeling like someone's replaced the lids with fine grit sandpaper while he's been asleep.

Squinting over at the glowing red numbers, he sighs. He'd already cut it as close as he could afford when he'd set his alarm last night; this morning there will be no snoozing a half dozen times until he feels more awake. He gropes along the top of the clock, finding the slider switch that turns the alarm off and flicking it, desperately resisting the temptation to let his eyelids fall closed again.

Okay, first, you're completely right, you have a really great grasp of mechanics. Second, I think you could probably wield that grasp in a more effective way by really focusing on the *story* part of the story. Which is to say, that these first paragraphs read a whole lot, a *whole* lot slower than the events that actually are taking place in them.

Part of that is because there are too many adjectives, and not-really-that-interesting adjectives. For example, 'loud, unforgiving buzz' gives me no clearer mental picture than 'buzz' alone. (And, in fact, a word like 'buzz' is generally strong enough and evocative enough to stand on its own).

Secondly, the content itself isn't very interesting: Elijah wakes up and he has a shower. It's fine to have that in a story but by making that the beginning of your story, and by describing it at length, you're really forcing the reader to pay a lot of attention to a part of the story that really isn't that interesting. Which gives the impression that the story itself won't be interesting. (And that's just not true!)

So, I know if I were beta-reading this, before I would even start cutting adjectives, I would cut to the heart of the story - to where the story really starts. And I would suggest that that point is probably about here:

Elijah's not surprised that Viggo's a good kisser, but he is surprised at the passion behind the kiss.

This is where the story starts to get active, and where Elijah starts to seem really engaged with the events in his own story. And where I, as a reader, started to feel engaged too.

So yeah, basically, you have a great grasp of the mechanics of writing (which is nothing to sniff at! that's hard!), but what I think you don't have yet (and this is something you'll totally get a handle on, because you're already 80% there) is a really good grasp of the kind of storytelling that appeals to a wider audience. And I think you could probably get better at that by concentrating on the story, and not worrying so much about the description.

You asked why people praise other stories and not necessarily yours, and I really don't know, but this is just my 20ish cents of guessing.

I think in *general*, wider audiences enjoy:

1. A story with a defined plot.
2. A story with a single, popular pairing.
3. A story with a happy ending.

But yeah, I'm just guessing.

[deleerium.livejournal.com]

I’m gonna just jump in head on. Your writing is technically proficient and professionally crafted - no question. However, the two things I notice when I read your stories are 1) sometimes I have to dodge your adjectives to get to the action and 2) I have a desperately unfulfilled sense that you know EXACTLY what your characters are feeling in any given moment, and that you are deeply involved when you are writing them, but you don’t show those emotions to the reader.

So here’s a little experiment. One of my favorites by you is “Pull”. So I’ve taken the liberty of doing a locked-to-you-only edit here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/deleerium/16072.html). (‘cause it’s too long for a comment)

1) I simply struck out the words that I had to ‘get around’ in order to follow the story. [My definition of a ‘get around’ word is one that related to the narrator rather than a character (for example: “but it had seemed like a good one at the time” in the first paragraph– it strikes me as an aside by the narrator and not essential to the storytelling) or an awkward adjective.]

2) The only emotional words you used:
‘slyly’ (Billy as he winks on his way out the door)
‘confidence’ (Dom as he approaches the women at the table)
‘wondering’ (the boys as they watch Dom to see if he’ll succeed)

And it left me CRAVING
I wanted to know more about Dom’s interactions with the two blondes. Did he look smug? Was he pleading? Teasing? Funny? Did the women have a reaction that was visible other than leaving with him?

Billy’s interaction with the redhead: masterfully flirting? Seductive? What were the expressions like on her face?

Orlando/Elijah – was there anything sensual about them on the dance floor? Determined? Surprised? Inevitable?

I’m convinced that you already know what all of them are thinking/experiencing/going through at every moment (I think) and I’m just DYING to see it on the page.

I think it’s important to say that I’m not suggesting you add entire descriptive paragraphs. The story arc itself is amazing -- the concept unique and lovely and just the right length. But I (as a reader) want at least one clue -- one little emotional clue word – for every interaction between characters. You don’t have to say “Billy felt smug.” But if you can combine your actions with the emotions they are related to? That would be the loveliest thing ever.

*grin* it’s also important to tell you that I do this in my own writing. Before it even goes to the beta, I cut through at least ½ the adjectives (which is a good thing -- I think -- cause I’m already the crazy adjective psycho queen) trying to find the action. And I have the opposite problem with the emotion – that I try to express too much sometimes in one scene and find myself having to pull back and say “ok, would Orlando really really feel x, y AND z? or would Elijah look x-emotionally at him that way? Or am I just getting wrapped up in the description?”.

So, there's my literary critique for the day ;)

luv, D

p.s. this is a fabulous idea, btw -- ok if i steal the concept?