|
Dancre -> RE: why post your work at all? (7/12/2008 9:41:37 PM)
|
ORIGINAL: Ganheim
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Dancre
Ok, Technique: Are you using realistic Dialogue or is it forced? Are the characters more goody-two-shoes or are they realistic? Is the plot a snooze-ville or interesting? Stuff like that.
Those all sound mostly opinion to me. There's a point where dialog is obviously forced, but outside of that one person may love it and another may hate it - for example some readers adore Isaac Asimov for his minimal action and narrative, and others hate him because "nothing ever happens but people talking".
Well, actually, no. There is a technique to dialogue, to make it 'human', like a normal conversation, not boring, dull, stuff like that. You'd be surprised at how many can't write dialogue. It fact, there are books written just on the subject of Dialogue. Dialogue isn't not an opinion, it's writing well. It's a very big difference. If the dialogue is boring, stiff, etc, who's going to want to read it? But you can use the narrative to pick up where you lack in dialogue and in the same way, you can use dialogue to pick up the narrative. You can use the dialogue to create any scene you want, but again, you have know how to do it. It's best to relay info in the dialogue instead of paragraph after paragraph of just info dumping. You can create suspense, love, hate, etc just with dialogue, but you'd be surprised as to how many can't do it. So you have to learn to do it.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Dancre
What would make it realistic in your opinion?
That's an opinion, unfortunately - you're never going to get one story that everybody considers good and realistic.
Well, actually, you took my quote out of context. What I said was:
That writer should have asked you questions, like what about the plot do you see as unrealistic? What would make it realistic in your opinion?
If you read the rest of that paragraph, I was addressing the poster who was upset b/c someone got upset over his critic. I was saying, the writer should have addressed the unrealistic problem instead of getting upset. ask questions, don't get mad. It has nothing to do with opinions, just looking at the story from another angle. It could just be that the person doesn't like the story, or it could really be unrealistic. It's not a good chance to take and one I advice no one to take.
quote:
There's a degree of technique in any of the discrepancies between what we see and what we want, but sometimes there's a lot of opinion. As already stated several times, why the criticism was given (and how it's interpreted) can be as important as any possible flaws or discrepancies. I'll agree with the above that a good author will take all the good possible (even from a bad review), that's what makes a good author rise above the rest.
quote:
Tho
I will agree that Criticism can come in the form opinions, and it does. But the question was, how do I, personally, form criticisms and I said, I look for techniques b/c I've learned with almost 35 rejections under my belt and talking to the publishers themselves that they DO look at technique. A person who doesn't know how to create minor, and yeah, I mean minor, characters and give them life is considered an amature, someone who can't form proper dialogue is looked over. Someone who tells the scene with no background, dull characters, and a sad story will get the happy little rejection letter. Boring dialogue gets the rejection. That's what I stand by b/c I've had to learn the hard way. And publishers won't tell you want you are doing wrong. Again, it's tough enough to get published, but if one doesn't know how to write well, then they'll never get past the internet. Trust me, I've got the horrible experiences under my belt. That's why I follow Technique in my criticisms and I always will, but that's just me.
But for others who may not know technique, opinions are important, but take them from a readers POV, not the way you personally write. Thanks.
kim
|
|
|
|