Writing comparisons
Every time I read a book my mind runs comparisons between the author's work and my own. In some cases I am inspired to do better by the prose and some in cases I am surprised at the quality of the work. I mean surprised as in "This is why the author self-published".
I don't intend to cast a critical eye on the work but I believe it's an unavoidable practice. Case in point, I recently read a mystery by a self-published author. The dialog was poorly written and the plot had major holes. I'm sure the author worked very hard on the manuscript but it does make me wonder if anyone read it before it went to press. I constantly hear from published authors that it's necessary to be part of a writer's group in order to get feedback on your work. I'll be honest that concept scares me more than the first Alien movie did.
When you spend hours, days, weeks, months and sometimes even years to complete the work, it's a part of you and allowing someone to possibly criticize it I would liken to someone criticizing your first born child. What if your "baby" is actually really ugly? How do you react to that kind of news? Do you shut out the comments and keep going or are you able to take the pieces which are productive and apply them?
My rationale for avoiding this process has been that I'm never sure who to trust. If someone has been writing for years and never been published, does that person know more than someone who just started the process? What makes one person's feedback more appropriate or constructive than someone else's?
If you know the answer to this question I will be gently rocking my "baby" and waiting for the opportunity to have a writer's group give me my first critique.
Leslie
I don't intend to cast a critical eye on the work but I believe it's an unavoidable practice. Case in point, I recently read a mystery by a self-published author. The dialog was poorly written and the plot had major holes. I'm sure the author worked very hard on the manuscript but it does make me wonder if anyone read it before it went to press. I constantly hear from published authors that it's necessary to be part of a writer's group in order to get feedback on your work. I'll be honest that concept scares me more than the first Alien movie did.
When you spend hours, days, weeks, months and sometimes even years to complete the work, it's a part of you and allowing someone to possibly criticize it I would liken to someone criticizing your first born child. What if your "baby" is actually really ugly? How do you react to that kind of news? Do you shut out the comments and keep going or are you able to take the pieces which are productive and apply them?
My rationale for avoiding this process has been that I'm never sure who to trust. If someone has been writing for years and never been published, does that person know more than someone who just started the process? What makes one person's feedback more appropriate or constructive than someone else's?
If you know the answer to this question I will be gently rocking my "baby" and waiting for the opportunity to have a writer's group give me my first critique.
Leslie
Comments
Post a Comment