The Pub Discussion Board

*waves*  I could stick my .5 cents in here somewhere (I actually got a title to go with my claims to editorial prowess, after all), but I don't know why I should.  I remember what happened at that "other" place.  It didn't work very well.  Of course, I didn't exactly take the editing test, either.  I believe I was too lazy at the time, something that reflects fairly accurately on my willingness to edit things.  So I failed too!  Woe is me.  Just about the only thing I can add is... I never, ever want TeNderLoin for an editor.  Supposedly he's all awesome and helpful and while it's probably true that he is horribly prolific, he's not at all accurate.  In fact, I have seen the original and his "revised" version on one or two things.  The revisions made me cringe. 

... I'm going to stop babbling and get off the soapbox now.  In summary: Hooray people who know what they're doing as opposed to those who only think they do, but are being misled by their overinflated sense of self-importance.  Boo morons who make things worse. 

(I really shouldn't have named names, but some people just push my buttons and I have to drag them out as handy examples whenever I can.  RealLifeDragon makes me foam at the mouth too, to be fair and find an auctorial example.)

Well, since we're on this topic, is there anyone out there who is willing to look at and advise on other people stories?

If asked, I will read a chapter or two and give editorial feedback. I'll go further if we're compatible.

I must warn that at least some writers seem crushed by the experience. Writing is, for most people, really hard, and just getting the story out of the brain and into words -- ANY words -- seems like a great effort that should be praised. To then have someone point out how much MORE work could be done... well, "motivating" isn't the first word that comes to mind.

Get an editor if you need help finding the extra work you want to do to improve your story and your skill as a writer. Otherwise don't bother. That's my advice.

By the way, if anyone knows of a writer's equivalent to Viagra, please point me to it.

If asked I am usually willing to read over someone's story.  People like Siath and AceMcCloud can say if I am deluding myself or not but I think can usually spot common spelling mistakes, make helpful word change suggestions and point out potential logic flaws or continuity problems.

I am very up front that I am not an expert on the usage of the comma however and if I make changes I try to be clear that they should take that suggestion with a grain of salt.

Okay, I'm only speaking for myself as an editing proofreader here:  When I take an author on, I make it my goal for them to eventually not need my services anymore.  In other words, I endeavor to teach.

Mostly, I do proofreading.  I keep my editing to a minimum because I'm of a mind that no one's style should be shit upon.  I will tell an author, "This was unclear to me," or "This didn't make any sense," or especially, "There's this glaring hole in your plot right here...", but generally, I refuse to say, "This could be better written this way..." because quite frankly, if people wanted to read stories written just like I'd write them, they could just read my stories.  I don't believe in trying to turn other authors into me.  When I do make suggestions about writing something, I will actually rewrite it only as a last resort, if I can't think of another way to get my point across clearly.

And one thing I absolutely never do as an editing proofreader is to simply correct the errors in the story and send it back.  This just guarantees me the same amount of work every time I edit for that author.  I highlight errors, and then put an explanation of why it's an error afterward.  That way, the author will (hopefully) eventually catch on to that particular grammar/punctuation/spelling rule, and I won't have to correct it anymore.  The hope is that there will eventually be few enough errors in their work that they don't really need me except to look over their stories and comment on the content.  But that's just my opinion of how it should be done.

Oh, and my personal opinion about accepting editorial criticism:  Any *true* author will want to improve their skills to the limit of their talent.  Anyone who doesn't is... just a person who happens to write stuff.

Imagineer wrote:

By the way, if anyone knows of a writer's equivalent to Viagra, please point me to it.

Well, this is as good a place to put this particular little rant as any.  The only Viagra for writers is called FEEDBACK.  Something that I am sorry to say the people who visit The Pub have apparently forgotten.  For the last three weeks, I have posted something every Monday morning.  My stats say those items have been downloaded several dozen times each.  Do you know how many comments I've gotten on them?  One or two.  That's not on each of them, mind you, that's on all of them combined!

The results are even worse from ASSTR, but I'm not here to rant at ASSTR people, just Pub people.  This whole discussion about an editorial council or guild or board or what-have-you depends very strongly on the participation of interested people.  I think that my recent postings prove one of two things:

1. We have no one interested in what goes on here,

- or -

2. Those who are interested are too fucking lazy to bother with so much as a feedback comment, let alone taking the time and effort to edit.

It seems that it always comes down to this: Readers don't want to "pay" for the privilege to read.  A very small group thinks otherwise, but the vast majority simply don't grasp the concept of rewarding authors for their hard work.

Sorry to have to vent in this topic, but I think it illustrates the over-arching problem with establishing any group of volunteers to help authors:  So few people give enough of a damn to actually DO it that they are already overloaded with work helping probably far more authors than they should, because they are so highly in demand.

*sigh* 

Net Wolf

Wow, as a reader I now feel important. And guilty. But mostly important: chalk another one up to hubris:).
     I know what you mean, NW, about editing with hopes that the author decides to work on their problems instead of coasting through their story like a steamboat once portrayed by a famous author as sinking slowly into the Mississippi. If there’s one thing I hate it’s when an author whose work I’ve edited publishes it without looking at the edits- especially when I leave the explanations next to the changes and commentary and the author posts the whole lot. Writing is supposed to be an experience for the author primarily, and for the reader secondarily. When an author decides that it’s not worth the effort to even so much as read through the latest version of his work before submitting it, he undermines the entire purpose of writing by dismissing his own benefit from the writing as well as by submitting utter crap for his readers.
     As I’m beginning to wax verbose, and as I think my grammar is deteriorating even farther, I’ll end this post.

With thanks for listening and the admonishment that meta theatre is a bad idea for beginning writers,

The N Storm

Last edited by TheNStorm (2007-08-01 20:06:42)

I'm pretty confident that Net Wolf's comments don't apply to me, but let me put in my tuppence.

First, doing a full edit really is hard work.  I've only done it once, and it took close to four hours for a relatively simple short story.   It's much easier to offer some general comments and clarify depending on the author's response.  It also assures that you don't put in a whole lot of effort and then find that the author either ignores you or you've completely misunderstood him.

Then there's the fact that most people who are interested in offering educational feedback have been severely burned more than once.  Most people who put things on the web really _aren't_ interested in feedback, and if they have fans a mild negative comment can generate torrents of abuse.  Unfortunately Net Wolf's recent conversation with institute3 could make it appear that this is one of those places.  Frankly, I think Net Wolf's comments were completely appropriate, but it could appear to some that negative comments simply aren't appreciated.  Now, while this has actually happened to me, I've learned to develop an even thicker skin when I'm commenting on someone else's work than I have for my own writing.

That said, I do think it's possible to develop the sort of environment that Net Wolf wants -- but it's going to take time.  If people can see a history of honest criticism they are much more likely to participate.  It should also be stated up front that authors posting to this site should be expected to take honest criticism gracefully.  The same goes for people doing the criticising.  If someone says I'm way off base about "Caught in the Web's" chapter 3 being anticlimactic (to use a recent example), I need to take that just as gracefully (if not more so) as Net Wolf took my original criticism.  We could write a whole bunch guidelines on this topic, but guidelines aren't nearly as effective as a community who simply works on the issues involved.  It's going to take time and work to build that sort of community though.

(And since I mentioned "Caught In the Web," what DO people think of my criticism?  Am I way off base?  I'm sure both Net Wolf and I want to know.  Reply there, NOT HERE.)

For Siath and others, I want to say it's far easier to comment on a story when it's beginning or ending.  At the very least, the resolution of a subplot presents opportunity for comments (and starting a new subplot in the middle of a story does not, by the way).  Simply jumping in with comments in the middle of a story in progress presents a lot of problems to both author and commentator.   The latest chapter of "Earth Base Alpha - The Return Home" didn't offer any resolutions, and so didn't offer (me at least) any real opportunities for comment.

I guess that isn't all I have to say, but I want to see what other people think of this response first.

1. We already have guidelines.  They're posted on the main site under "Critiquing Guide".  It appears in two separate places on the menu, because I think it's that important.

2. I agree that people who are not familiar with me may take some of my comments more harshly than they are intended.... though that particular person deserved much harsher than I gave.  But I've gotten too much flak over the years not to shoot back when it's unwarranted.

3. I will personally say you weren't way off base with your criticism of CITW Ch. 3... I just don't happen to agree with you on most of what you said.  That's an opinion.  *shrugs*  Actually, the story probably could have used more upheaval in chapter 3, but I don't like any of what you suggested for it.  So sue me. 

4. Force yourself to give feedback.  I don't care if the author provided you a good place to say something or not.  Tell them that you liked the latest chapter... or that you didn't.  Give them ideas of where to go from where they are (unless they've made it clear they don't want such suggestions...)  I dare say that, if you actually try, you can find SOMETHING to comment on, either positively or negatively, in every chapter you've ever read.  SAY IT.  As an author for the last ten years, I can tell you that nothing motivates me to write more than getting feedback.  If no one gives a damn that I'm writing... why should I bother posting it?  (Note I did not ask why I should bother writing it.  I write it because I enjoy writing it.  But why should I provide you with entertainment if you're not going to give me some validation?)

Net Wolf

Wow... eleven posts since yesterday just on this thread?  Maybe I found a magic word, because I haven't seen such a flurry here in a while.  What word do you think it was? "Idiot people pretending to proofread/edit documents?"  Wait, that's way more than one word.

Hey, be nice.

Siath

Net Wolf wrote:

3. I will personally say you weren't way off base with your criticism of CITW Ch. 3... I just don't happen to agree with you on most of what you said.  That's an opinion.  *shrugs*  Actually, the story probably could have used more upheaval in chapter 3, but I don't like any of what you suggested for it.  So sue me. 

And since it's your story you make the final decisions.  I don't have any problems with that at all.  I would like to know what other people think though.  Even if it's "J.A.W. you need to go back and read the story from the beginning and . . ."

siath wrote:

Negative feedback can be counter productive if not done right. While all authors have to deal with it, I just toss the ones who give me no idea of why they didn't like a story.

Hey, at least you get negative feedback.  I barely get any feedback at all, and when I do, the negative is relating to the site design, not the story.

CSquared

siath wrote:

Hey, be nice.

Siath

If my comment was taken as not nice I apologize I was trying to have some fun with BR saying that she is good at getting the conversation going.