Whenever the critical turkeys make you crazy, read these two posts and know you are not alone

[shadowkat]

This past weekend, I hit a snag on my novel, which was NOT aided by a bunch critical posts on lj "justifying" the rejection letters or lack of response agents and publishers give to writers who've submitted work - you know sometimes you just think why bother sharing your work at all? Easier to just keep it to yourself. Sharing one's work, whether it be a knitted scarf, a piece of pottery, a beaded bracelet, a handwoven basket, or a story - is a bit like presenting one's child to a teacher the first day of preschool, hoping there's room in the class. (There's been a Baby Boom in Brooklyn and there's 300 applicants for every preschool, which takes about 18-20 kids each). All your love and care has gone into it and you think as you present this fragile piece of your heart - please treat it kindly, don't rip it to shreds. Forgetting of course that there's a hundred parents and kids waiting in line behind you and the teacher's tired and cranky and can only accept eighteen for the class.

At any rate...these two posts made me feel better this weekend and I thought I'd share them with the rest of my writer friends:

1. This one is a rant by Joss Whedon on whedonesque. He had just finished writing the first arc of the upcoming Season 8 Buffy Comic, and wandered onto his fansite to see how people were reacting to the promos of his work - the first five panels to be exact. And the internet being the internet...well, suffice it to say he has his critics.

If you are afraid of being spoiled for the comic, although you'd have to be living under a rock not to be on this part...I'd think. Here's the gist: Anyway, it's idiotic for me to defend the work -- you either dig or you don't. All I can do, he more or less says, and in more than one interview I've read - is create my work and throw it out there. You'll either like or you won't. I have no control over that.


I just finished the last pages of this arc and here you are reading the first. Circle-y. I am serene and at one with the universe. And yet there's this term... 'wanked around'... Hmm.

I love "The Girl in Question". I thought it was hilarious and relevent and everyone involved was at the top of their game. When I started writing the comic I had Buffy with the Immortal but it felt wrong. It was important for Angel and Spike to know she had moved on, but it was equally important for Buffy to be where she is in this comic book. And I realized Andrew WOULD have thought this up, and would have thought it was hilarious (plus the wink at the fact that everyone knew that was a double in the ep was fun). As for his input -- he was running the L.A. slayer unit in season 5 of Angel, so it's safe to assume he's got some cred. You could call this wank, but you could say the same about any retcon -- like Spike loving Buffy from the start and not realizing it, which worked for me just great, especially 'cause it had the chaos demon standing around with his antlers dripping (good times, good times). Anyway, it's idiotic for me to defend the work -- you either dig or you don't. But the part that keeps stopping me is this: why on Earth WOULDN'T George Lucas discount the Star Wars Holiday Special?

"But... how do you kill a thing... that has no life?"

Ranty, -j.


2. jimbutcher, the writer of the best-selling sci-fi noir series The Dresden File which is premiering as a TV show on Sci-Fi in late January, posted on his lj - scroll down a few entries, it's back in the beginning of December, I believe - a sampling of the negative reviews he'd gotten on his books. At the very end of the post, which contains everything from a gun expert chiding him on his research to people who think his writing is rudimentary or the plots poorly constructed, he writes - "some days it's sort of hard to get motivated".

Here's an example of two of the reviews:

"Hrrrrrm"
As a werewolf fan, I had to give the Harry Dresden series one more chance and picked up the second book. Not as hard to push through as book one, but in the end I was not satisfied with the read.

I'll give it two stars for the interesting take on werewolf types, but that's about it. The content had me grinding my teeth as FBI agents and Police acted so outrageously unrealistic the suspension of disbelief couldn't hold.

I enjoyed minute parts scattered through the book, but it's like picking the chocolate sprinkles out of an otherwised soured dessert.

"What a Letdown"
All I can say is that I was truly dissapointed in this book. I have read fantasy/Sci-fi nearly all of my life and this was a waste of $8.00 and change. The Author seems to write like this is his first novel and he is trying really hard to throw every possible situation and character definition into 500 pages of dribble. The main character, if you want to call him that since the book is so choppy, is well built I suppose. But it also follows the same pat design of so many other GOOD novels by GOOD authors (ex: Eddings and Feist). I am not comparing those two authors to Butcher since that would be like comparing a kindergarten play to Broadway. It is even so embarassing that one of Butcher's place names is the same as Eddings in the Belgariad. I suggest to save your money and time by not purchasing this book."

In response to this post, by the way, Butcher received over 138 replies telling him how these reviewers were full of it. Some of the responders were booksellers and some librians who could not keep his books on the shelves.

Both made me feel better. Apparently everyone has their critics. Next time I get overwhelmed by mine, real or imaginary - I'm re-reading this.

Comments

Criticism

[ruthless1.livejournal.com]

I've been in a celtic renaissance music ensemble for fourteen (almost fifteen) years. None of us have studied music at a university level but between the three of us we play 10 instruments well enough to get sound good and sometimes get paid for it. We've sold a few thousand of our cds. We played at countless weddings and parties and receptions over the years. And I can tell you VERBATIM what the two harshest critics said (to my face) about our music. I can't remember all the nice really huge compliments we've gotten verbatim but those two little statements? Just about did me in. I am not playing as much professionally anymore because music is so important to me - I don't want someone paying me money (well - that's not TOTALLY true) and turning my passion into a commodity that they can purchase. I don't make a living at this and that is a big reason why.

Re: Criticism

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Completely get that - in the same place regarding my art and writing. I'm almost too emotionally invested in it for my own good. And am working hard to overcome that. The problem with the world - I think - is that they want you to write the stories they want to read, or play the music they want to listen to. Not the work that you necessarily want to share or is in your heart. It feels at times like having a conversation with someone and if you aren't talking about a topic that they can relate to or hits their experience, then off they go, and you might as not be talking at all.

But, for every critic out there, there are people who love what you are producing. To deprive those who do want to hear what you have to say, do want to see your work, do want to read it - just because of the critics/detractors - is I think unfair to them. I remember a while ago reading an interview of Amy Acker's who played Fred on Angel for several years. She repeated a conversation she'd had with Alexis Densiof, regarding a time when she went online and read what people were saying about her performance on the series. He'd asked her if there were any positive posts - well yes, she responded, but all she saw were the two negative ones. She ignored everyone else. I've done it myself - when I wrote those essays and posted them online. But what's important to remember, I think, is that the negative responses did not stop Amy Acker, Joss Whedon, or Jim Butcher from doing their art.

Re: Criticism

[ruthless1.livejournal.com]

" But what's important to remember,I think, is that the negative responses did not stop Amy Acker, Joss Whedon, or Jim Butcher from doing their art."

Nor will it stop us! For soon - the creative types will take over the WORLD!!!
*cheers all around*

The downside is that no one will ever wear matching socks or clean their rooms again if we really DO take over.

Re: Criticism

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

LOL!!! Well I might clean my room again, but matching socks, wait...blue and black do look alike in certain lights - such as the light in my bedroom. Dang it.

Re: Criticism

[ruthless1.livejournal.com]

I definitely have a bit of clothes matching problem since my bedroom is so dark in the morning - even with the light on. This should not in any way, preclude me from taking over the world with you but Earthling may have to be governed by a mandolin wielding, mismatched sweater set wearin' CREATIVE person.
*nods sagely*

Re: Criticism

[ann1962]

I have come to believe there is a timeline regarding the growth of the creative spirit. Strewn socks and dust bunnies are part of it.

Radical interpretation of Whedon's Anya bunny fears!

Re: Criticism

[ruthless1.livejournal.com]

That works for me.
*eyeballs dustbunny colony that has moved in near my door*

Re: Criticism

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Actually I'm thinking we may have to fight the dust bunnies for world dominance. Anya's fear had a lot more to it than one may think...

Dust bunnies adore NYC apartments. They seem to multiply by just looking at each other.

Re: Criticism

[ruthless1.livejournal.com]

Dust bunnies adore ME because I abhor the sound of the vacuum cleaner. It's TOO loud and annoying.

[beanbeans.livejournal.com]

Your metaphor couldn't be more apt to where I'm at emotionally with regards to sharing both my novel and my fanfic. And your links certainly are reassuring.
Thanks again for this. If you don't mind, I'd like to save this post to memories. :)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Not at all. Save away, I've more or less done the same thing for myself. ;-)

[ann1962]

How people receive what I have written is so beyond what I can control, the huge diversity of their response taught me that I *should* just worry about my own view of it as crap/not crap. Not that I don't listen to them though...

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

It's hard not to listen and the one's who scream the loudest are often the harshest critics. Whedon's rant on whedonesque reassurred me a bit, because here is an accomplished writer - who has gotten paid quite a bit of money for his writing and has not one but several fansites devoted to it - and yet, he too, gets upset when someone he doesn't know, has never met, and writing under a pseudonyme no less criticizes his work. Made me laugh at myself a bit and realize, okay, see it happens to everyone.

I remember when I posted those essays on the boards - I'd always be a bit terrified, no matter how often I did it, to push the post button.
I'd wait on pins and needles for an hour, maybe less, maybe more, before checking back to see how people responded - if they responded - if they in fact even noticed it. (They didn't always - when I first posted on ATPO - I had several essays disappear into archives with one, maybe two, or 0 responses. ) And if I got lots of great responses, it was the critical ones - usually just one or two, maybe three that made me crazy and I'd fret over. There were, shames me to say it now, a couple of people I was afraid to read. That said, I did love the debates, the constructive criticism - which made me a better writer. So..it's not bad too listen, I think, just bad to take it too much to heart...which is far easier said than done.

[ann1962]

If someone I value likes my writing, it thrills me to no end. Conversely if the reverse is true, knife through the heart. I am less terrified now, but I still delete stuff. Especially when I can see the warts. I think becoming a better writer allows you to see the warts, and makes you hyper-aware of what you need to learn. Given that trajectory, I wonder sometimes how writers write at all. Reading some writer blogs have informed me about that some. I find them hugely comforting. Like the Whedon comments. And seeing behind the words is always fascinating. Double gifting.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Agree.

Yet, it's not just the people's opinions that I value which can hurt, sometimes, for no reason that makes sense to me, it is the random stranger, the friend of a friend - that hurts. All the more so when others appear to agree with them. I think that may have been what prompted Whedon's rant.

For two years I could not write fiction - essays, posts on the net, sure, but not fiction - not what lay close to my heart - and the internet was partly to blame for it - the critical voices of people I did not really know - which for reasons that made no sense to me began to echo in my own head whenever I stared at that blank page, second-guessing every decision I made. Every sentence. Every point.
Debating it. It took me a while to learn how to shut it off. And to use what I had learned about my own writing while on learn constructively.

To, like you state, see the warts, yet not be hyper-aware of them to the degree you fear going outside and letting others see them. Not being so self-conscious. It's like doing anything, I think, if you focus too much on what you are doing wrong or making it "perfect", you can't do it at all - you become frozen. It's why there's nanwrimore or whatever it is called - to help people become unfrozen, to turn off that voice that requires them to be perfect. The irony is that sometimes the beauty in art lies in the imperfections the flaws.
This may sound odd but what I liked most about BTVS and ATS at times were the gaps, the little mistakes or surprises - the unplanned imperfections - it made the shows resonate more for me. I often tend to forget the art that is neat, tidy, and perfectly rendered. Did you know that the Papago Indians (Native Americans) deliberately insert a flaw in their bead work? (My Grandmother learned to bead from a Papago Indian Woman - pretty sure it was Papago, memory is odd at times). The reason is that the flaw lets the evil spirits out.

Take two

[ann1962]

deliberately insert a flaw in their bead work?

So do the Amish women into their quilts. Different reason though, they say that only God can make something perfect. So they insert an error. I find that funny in that they are acknowledging their perfection by inserting a mistake.

Yes. Deleted the other because I realized in the shower it might be misinterpreted by others. Don't want that. Anyhoo, comment still holds. The complexity of communication is so very difficult. Funny how it returns to what Whedon was saying in the first place.

Re: Take two

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Agreed with the previous comment and completely understand why you deleted it. And it's hard to communicate - Because there is a fine line between what I call being "constructive" - the gentle poke, you might want to change that or I see a hole in your arguement, and being "critical for the sake of being critical".

Whedon's post makes me smile because what he says is so true.
And he seems aware of the price of being a "popular" serial writer.
The problem with serials is they are continuing stories and you can't really deliver the entire story to the reader at one time - so as a result there may be gaps of time between the point when you read say chapter 27 and chapter 28 - because with a televsion or comic or even a book series such as Harry Potter - the story is a Work in Progress.
While this can be exciting, it poses a couple of interesting issues regarding readers - first it encourages their interaction. You aren't depending on them just reading one book - but reading all of them or one episode. You are more inclined to want to know what they think, how they are responding, to determine what is or isn't working to help with the next portion. They, in return, become aware of their potential influence on the work. The other problem - and this is with the gap of time in between - if a reader/watcher has become emotionally invested in the story - it is natural for them to start speculating or trying to think what comes next. The longer the wait, the more likely they are to come up with their own story for your characters in the interim - as a means of satisfying that urge for more story - they may even seek out other people who can do it for them (fanfic). The problem with this - is people become attached to what they came up with. The answers they provided for the gaps in your narrative - for instance, we are never told one way or another if Spike had a father, sisters, brothers, etc - we just see a 26 year old man closely involved with his mother - which can be interupted numerous ways. The writer could come back at some point and say give the character a sister, a brother, or maybe even a father - but if the watcher has become convinced that Spike was fatherless and an only child - they may rant - "this is a complete retcon! How dare you.
You wanked this." Not unlike the Immortal - who we never see, or for that matter Buffy - there are many explanations for that scene - if the one the writer chooses is not the one the watcher came up with, or wanted to result - the watcher goes nuts. It can of course work to the writer's benefit as well - if the decision they've made is better than what the viewer or reader came up with on their own (or they like it better) they love the writer, if it is by some absurd twist of luck the same as what they came up with - then they may even become obsessed and think this is the best thing they've ever seen.
More often than not - it is likely to be the opposite, since we don't have ESP and really can't know for certain what someone else is thinking until they tell us. It's a really odd Catch-22 for a writer, I think.

Re: Take two

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Ugh typos...I really should proof-read before posting responses.