Don't Get Me Started on ....Writers' Forums

The other day someone on one of the bazillion writing forums I belong to asked what everyone thought about An Other writing forum.  Although I belong to An Other forum I didn't reply.  Whenever these sorts of questions crop up it can be a cue for a flame war and I didn't fancy getting involved.


Forums are odd entities.  They tend to bring out territoriality in their members, even though they don't even exist in a physical sense.  The idea that you can belong to a forum is really silly when you think about it.  A group of people post comments on a web page; everything about it is mutable: for a start, the members may not even be real people at all.  Unless you have met them in the flesh how can you know for sure?  Sock puppets and fake IDs are more common than you'd expect.  And if they are real, what is it that binds you to them other than some half baked opinions?


I've been trolling around the Internet for - well, too long.  I've been a member of many writers' forums and I've noticed characteristics they all share, although they invariably claim to be unique and special:

• They all claim to be the best and rubbish the competition.
• They all have cliques even if they strenuously deny it, and they usually do.
• They all have trolls and flamers even if the strenuously deny it, and they usually do.
• They all demand loyalty to the forum and frown on any individualistic behaviour that threatens it, like making negative comments elsewhere online.
• They all have some sort of pecking order despite claiming to be democratic, which they usually do.

It never fails to amaze me what people will put up with for the dubious benefits of belonging to a forum.  Tin pot dictators abound on these boards, self-appointed experts laying down the law as if they had some say over anything, when the reverse is patently the case.  The world of writing and publishing is not some highly organised conglomerate but a melee of competing individuals.  There are no rules other that What You Can Get Away With.  But it doesn't stop some trying to impose their own regulation and others accepting and parroting it in a self-perpetuating cycle of delusion.  


Not only do we buy this, we lap it up - we go looking for it.  Human beings seem to need the discipline of a set order even if it's only illusory.  Perhaps that's the reason we're only too happy to give up our freedom; anything is better than the chaos of reality.


But the worst aspect of forums is the Groupthink, that zombie trance of blind obedience where people act as one monstrous entity.  Somehow the monster grows, feeding off mutual flattery, steered by a few dominant personalities until the members find themselves collaborating in behaviour they wouldn't dream of doing in real life.  Bullying is the most obvious expression of this, but it can take many forms.


A kind of swaggering one-upmanship can come into play.  I've witnessed Monty Python's Four Yorkshiremen-style contests on the most bizarre topics, like who was the most abused by a former boss, or who's written the nastiest Amazon review.  At some point you hope they will wake up and have a "what was I thinking?" moment, but I wouldn't bet on it, especially if they've taken the precaution of hiding their true identity to give themselves carte blanche in the bitchiness stakes.


I was warned off writers' forums some years ago by a published author who noted that she didn't know any successful writers who bothered with them.  And it's true, the people who really could give you useful help and advice don't seem to inhabit these enclaves.  These days I do more lurking than posting - some kind of sentimental attachment stops me deleting my accounts altogether, and they are after all a fascinating study in group behaviour and self-delusion.  But I no longer believe in the Rules, the grand sounding promotional material, the self-aggrandisement.  Writers shouldn't belong anywhere if they truly want to have their own voice.

Draft 3

I started this week feeling depressed. Not only did I have a pair of decorators crawling all over my house with ladders and jet sprays and scrapers, but I realised that my rolodex of excuses for not starting my third redraft of WIP had run out. So amid all the banging and spraying and scraping outside I had to open up my WIP and face the type face armed only with a dried up pool of enthusiasm.

But, an odd thing happened. I recently did a few crits - yes, I know I complained about crit sites in a recent post, but that just proves what a hypocrite I am - and found the experience oddly rewarding. Starting to work on Chapter 1 of WIP I began to relive that rush of excitement I remember of old. That feeling of power and control. Now, two chapters in, I'm getting drunk on it.

It's so long since I did any serious editing I'd really forgotten how much I enjoy it. At this stage anything can be changed. The drudgery of churning out X many words a day is past - now it's about the bigger picture. Does this work? Should this go here, or there? Chopping, changing, deleting, rewriting. Crafting. I LOVE it.

Mind you, I'm only two chapters in. Watch this space.

Crit Groups

So you write a book and you edit it to within an inch of its life. You get so sick of looking at it and thinking about it you want to toss it in the trash, but something holds you back. No - better keep it on the hard drive, just in case. A few months later you stumble across it and start reading. Wow! Not bad! Maybe I should get a second opinion on this.

So you join a critique group. Lots of clever writers to tell you what's wrong and how to fix it. Just the ticket.

So you post your chapters and await their responses with baited breath. Some may be complimentary, which gives you a boost. Some may miss the point entirely which makes you feel frustrated and upset. Occasionally someone is perceptive enough to see what you're trying to do and offers some solid gold advice on how to improve your work. But that's rare. The fact is, the crit shoot is a long shot at best.

I think the problem with crit groups is:

They are populated with a wide range of people - wide ranging in taste as well as ability.

They exist to find fault with a piece so people don't read something to appreciate its merits, ie the way a reader would read. If you study the first chapter of any novel you will find faults of some sort. It's inevitable. A reader reads to be transported but that won't happen in 'edit' mode.

Unless you beta read the whole thing, there is no way of gauging the whole story. Early chapters can only tell a very limited amount about the writer's ability.

Critters can become full of their own importance, in the way a lot of critics think their critique is more important than the art they are describing. Opinions can become entrenched, rules written in stone. Show don't Tell is one of the favourites, despite the fact many novels are chock full of tell. And bad advice from inappropriately applied 'rules' undermines a writer's confidence.

So, when dabbling in crit groups have a care and always remember a crit is one person's opinion and nothing more.

Crit and Chat

Just a quick post to say me and some of my online writer buddies have started a new free-to-join writers' forum. Crit and Chat is for writers who enjoy the company of other writers to..well, crit and chat. More news about this soon.

Censored

Well, after five (or is it six) years on writers' boards it has finally happened. A post of mine was deleted on Absolute Write Water Cooler. Yes, I'm still reeling from the shock too. Anyone who knows me knows I don't post Without Due Care And Attention, unlike some. Usually I agonise for hours before poking a tentative toe into a discussion - even then I mince my words so finely the meaning is almost lost for fear of upsetting anyone. I'm not a troll by any stretch of the imagination.

Of course I understand the need to edit - as writers we do it every day and only a fool gets so attached to his words he can't accept the process. But obliterating someone's opinion is a very dangerous road to go down. You may not like what others think, but even if you disagree it should be an opportunity to reevaluate your own opinions. As humans we need that outlet. Without the ability to express ourselves what else do we have? Terrorists plant bombs because they have no voice. They up the stakes until someone listens.

But don't worry, I won't be planting any bombs. This has however made me reevaluate my opinion of that board. Any place that has no respect for individual writers and allows the mob to rule is probably best avoided. It's taken some years, but I am learning.

Why Was I Rejected?

One topic that comes up a lot on writers' boards is what to do if your manuscript is rejected. Should you keep working on it and try again or give up and start something new?

I've been in this position myself so I know how frustrating it is to get form rejections. At first they might be worded so nicely you think they are saying something good about your writing, but in time you come to realise they don't mean anything much other than the fact that the agent/editor doesn't want your book. Agents/editors don't generally give feedback because it's too time consuming and often people react badly to criticism. So always assume it's a form rejection unless it mentions specific details about your book.

If you are blessed with a personal letter - and I use the word advisedly because you should always bear in mind that no one owes you anything at this point so they're doing you a huge favour by taking the trouble - it may address possible areas that need improvement. This kind of feedback is like gold dust. Professionals working in the industry know what a book needs to get accepted and published, so you should take their advice very seriously. Of course, you may not agree with it, that is your right. After all, it is your book and only you can decide how you want the finished product to look. But if you want to reach a wider audience than your family, friends and critique group you would be wise to at least consider their opinion.

But what if you get no advice? That's a tough one because there are so many possible reasons for a book to be rejected. Unless someone tells you specifically what the problem is you could be wasting your time and energy on rewrites. Here are some possibilities:

1. The writing isn't good enough
This is the main one. You need to ask yourself some tough questions. Why do you think you can write a novel? Have you ever had any acclaim or praise for your writing from anyone other than your mother? If you're writing in isolation and not showing your work to anyone you can easily fall into the trap of thinking it's great when it isn't. It is painful to face criticism but if you want to go the whole distance and see your work in a bookshop, you have to get used to others critiquing your work.

There are different approaches to this. Joining a writers' group is a good start. You will get free feedback from like minded authors as well as learning a lot about self-criticism by critiquing their work. I've been a member of a few online groups. They also help you network and learn about the industry and perfect your synopsis and query letter. You will make some good online friends that way, which gives you a shoulder to cry on in tough times.
You can also pay for a critique from an editorial consultancy. These don't come cheap so you need to do some research before forking out for one.

Learning to take criticism is basic to being a professional author. Even if every agent and editor loved your book you can bet there will be some armchair critic out there dying to give you a one star review on Amazon, and some of these reviews are eye-wateringly vicious.

If this is your first attempt at a novel the chances are it just isn't good enough. First novels rarely get published because they are the ones we make all our basic mistakes on in the process of learning the craft. Most published authors have a few duds under their mattress. So you need to ask yourself how attached you are to this particular book, whether you want to spend a year or more reworking it or whether you'd prefer to start on something new. Remember it's never a waste though. You have cut your author's teeth on that book and everything you write from now on will be that much better.

2. The Concept is not good enough
Is your story original? Different? Intriguing? Or is it a thinly veiled rehash of a Bonanza episode you once saw? Have you researched what is being published in your genre? Is your book sufficiently similar but with an unexpected twist to capture the reader's imagination?
One of the toughest lessons to learn is no one really cares how well you can write. If you can't hook them with a great story they'll buy something else that does.

3. You are writing the wrong genre
What do you love to read? If it's romance, then why are you trying to write children's fiction? You should be writing what you love to read. And don't fall into the trap of thinking anyone can write a children's book/Dan Brown-type thriller/blood-and-guts horror story. You must know your genre like the back of your hand and then you must write something even better than the ones you love to read. It's not enough to be 'as good as'. There is already a Stephen King in the world so why would anyone want another one?

Why Writers are Drama Queens

I'm reading a fascinating book at the moment: Three Uses of the Knife - On the Nature and Purpose of Drama by playwright David Mamet. It's not an easy read - when it's finished I'm going to read it again because I really want to understand what he's saying - but it's worth the effort because he has some profound ideas about the nature of drama and why we need it.

Novels are dramas on the page instead of the stage. The novel form may be relatively new but dramas are as old as humanity and meet some psychological need we all share. Don't we dramatise everything in our lives? Don't we love to hear gossip? And doesn't it explain the success of soap operas?

I think writers are particularly prone to this, which accounts for the compulsion to write stories. Our minds are like super-computers, piecing together the intricate jigsaws of the world around us, embellishing the mundane with flights of fancy. And spending so much time alone in our imaginary dramatic worlds makes us different. We live in our heads. It can render us prickly and neurotic when we come up against the real world. Writers are sensitive souls, prone to exaggeration and flouncing out if our feelings are hurt or our sensibilities affronted. I see this behaviour on writers' boards all the time.

We need delicate handling. It's sad that the world doesn't usually afford us that gentleness. The submissions process is particularly painful to the sensitive artist, and all around us are obstacles and injustices designed to break our spirit. But it doesn't have to be so bad. We should be aware of our own vulnerability and act accordingly, learn strategies to shield our fragile egos. We can treat our fellow writers with generosity and kindness. We can be the change we want to see in this harsh Writing World.

More Internet Paranoia

I love the internet. Don’t laugh, I really do. For all its faults it has revolutionised communications and research. YouTube is brilliant. Where else could you listen to the theme song from Stop The Pigeon after all these misspent years and without paying a penny?

And of course there are the message boards. Now, I’ve written about these before so you’ll know I hang around a good few writers’ boards. They’re useful for picking up tips and bits of news, even getting peer review if that’s what you’re after. But this week I made a sobering discovery I want to share with you.

Unless you set up your own forum where you have editorial control of your posts, you can never be sure they will be left unedited for all eternity.

That’s it. Is it a big deal? Well, let’s just think about it. Suppose you hold a strong viewpoint on something and it differs from the administrators of the message board. Not only can they ban you from the forum, thus denying you the opportunity to delete your posts, they can also edit your posts to reflect what they believe. This isn’t an issue for those of us who hide behind clever usernames – although most people with a modicum of sense can track you down if you post links to your website or blog – but for any honest unsuspecting person who uses their own identity it’s potentially hazardous. Imagine the indignity of coming up in a Google search spouting fascist dogma you don’t even agree with! And it could happen. I’ve seen it happen this week and the implications for writers are far-reaching and troubling.

It came as a shock and made me realise that no forums are actually really free. There’s always a price to pay of some sort, and I wouldn’t like to think it was my integrity. So should we trust writers’ forums? From now on I’ll be taking a much closer look at who’s pulling the strings behind these groups before I post a thing. You can’t be too careful.

More quotes

"People on the outside think there's something magical about writing, that you go up in the attic at midnight and cast the bones and come down in the morning with a story, but it isn't like that. You sit in back of the typewriter and you work, and that's all there is to it."
Harlan Ellison

Boy, don't I know it. I'm now forty chapters down on the Big Revision. Some bits fly past and don't need much work, other scenes need completely rewritten. So it's hard to know how fast I'm progressing. Forty chapters sounds a lot, but there's still the hardest part to come - the End. Apart from the beginning it's the most important bit to get right.

I do have mixed feelings about revisions. In some ways it's better than the first draft because the story is down, all you need is to add colour and texture. Other times it's headbangingly frustrating; trying to find the right mood, trying to steer the characters and make the dialogue believably real while serving the plot. When it's going badly it isn't going at all. Everything stalls. When it's going well it flies and nothing is more satisfying.

"Being a good writer is 3% talent, 97% not being distracted by the Internet."
Anonymous

Another one that's funny and true. I spend too much time online, or have until lately. Nowadays I'm not getting as much satisfation from the various writers' groups I have belonged to in the last two years. The tips and advice seem to be on a loop and I've heard 99% of it before, the arguments never change and just wind me up. This week I've been so busy on the book I've only checked in briefly to make sure nothing major is going on, but I'm seriously considering giving up on them for good. Facebook is better for me, and as a friend observed this week, writing is really a solitary business and the fewer distractions we have the better.

Should money flow to the writer?

Money should flow to the writer.

This is a phrase I've seen used a lot on various writers' boards. Usually it comes up in response to a query about using editorial services or scam publishers. The first time I saw it I thought "Damn Right! Give me the money!" but as with all things I've come to realise it's not the coverall mantra for every situation I first thought it was.

The trouble with these stock responses is they can blinker you into a mindset that doesn't help you in the longterm. Of course I want the money to flow to the writer. Who wouldn't? But the hard reality is money will only flow towards you if you have something to sell. And until you reach that heady peak of perfection everything has to be seen as a learning curve. You wouldn't refuse to pay for a university education on the basis that money should flow towards you even if you had no skills to offer, would you? So it's the same with writing. Until you learn enough to sell your work you have to be prepared to pay for the education you receive.

Now, I've got nothing against peer review groups. If you're lucky you can pick up some great tips from them as well as gauge reaction to your work. But to say they provide all the training you require to become a publishable writer is naive. Over the years I have spent hundreds of pounds on writers' courses and books to research and learn this craft and I still don't think I know it all. To believe you can get all that for free from a few well meaning amateurs on a website is dooming yourself to failure.

What I'm saying is, Yes, Money Should Flow To The Writer - but only once you have earned that title by producing something someone will buy. Until then, be prepared to pay for your education.

Writers' Groups - a word of caution

I don't share Edie's cynicism about Writers' Groups; I probably wouldn't still be writing if it hadn't been for the camaraderie and encouragement I received early on from online Writers' Groups, and for that I'm eternally grateful. Writing is a lonely business unless you happen to live in a writer's commune or have the good fortune to come from a family of writers. I don't. So any contact and friendship is valuable.

And you can learn a lot from them, not just about the craft of writing although there's that of course. To be honest I haven't found critiques to be terribly helpful on the whole. Critiquing other people's work is more useful - it teaches you to look critically at your own work which is what you ultimately need to be able to do. Crits of your work do prepare you for the scathing criticism you'll be subjected to if you ever submit your work for scrutiny, helping you to develop a thick skin which is definitely necessary.

They are useful places to exchange tips and information about the publishing business. It's a good way to find out about new agencies and who's recruiting. They are good places to ask for advice from people who've already travelled your path and have some experience to share.

BUT - here we get to the snag - it's always important to remember that not every poster on a website knows what they are talking about. Think about it. You don't really know these people except by what they say about themselves, and sadly there are many deluded fantasists out there. However well meaning they are, their clumsy and badly thought out advice can be worse than nothing.

And then there are the few whose motives are a little more sinister; another thing to bear in mind is there is a lot of frustration and jealousy in the writing community. Some people cannot bear to see someone else getting the success or even attention they crave and will do all they can to put a fly in the ointment.

So, how do you know who to trust?

Well, honesty is usually easy to spot because it chimes as "common sense". You may not always like this advice at first, if it isn't what you want to hear, but the truth of it will usually sink in after a day or two.
Check out their credentials if possible. Do they have a book published by a reputable company? Do they hold the respect of the people around them? Or are they always getting into flame wars and causing arguments on the site?
Always take advice with a degree of caution, wherever it comes from, and use your own discretion about following it. Even industry insiders can be so jaded and embittered their advice is tainted and not worth much, so learn to follow your instinct first and foremost.

Remember - no one can tell you what is best for you - only you can do that.

What are critiques for?

Following on from my earlier post about writers' groups, I got to thinking: what do we need crits for? OK, I know, I know. We need crits to find out if our story is any good. But do crits really tell us? All they tell us is what a handful of people think, after all.

I think critting is useful because it helps us to see our work more objectively. That's a hard thing to do when you're stuck in your little garret scribbling away without another soul for company. The story is part of you; you give birth to it and like your beloved offspring it is too close to your heart to see its faults.

But it's not just what others think of our work that teaches us objectivity. It's what we learn from critting other people's work. That is ultimately more valuable because spotting someone else's flaws is always easier and teaches us to better spot our own. And ultimately that is what we need to do to become professional writers. We need to see our own flaws and fix them.

To Peer Review or Not

When you've finished your story, how do you know if it's any good? Received wisdom suggests joining a writers' group to get impartial feedback from your peers. I've belonged to a couple of online ones and they can be very helpful up to a point.

But the problem is the whole business is so subjective. What I love could be dead boring to someone else, and vice versa. I once tried to review a sci-fi novel and couldn't make head nor tail of it, but then I don't usually read much sci-fi so is the fault mine, or theirs?

And these groups are peopled by a wide array of levels of expertise. From relative beginners to, if you're lucky, industry pros and published authors. Not all the advice on offer is worth the trouble. And who do you believe?

There are definitely some unreliable types to beware of. The embittered wannabe has been writing his whole life and never published a thing. He sees himself as the angry young man, although he's now well into middle age, and the publishing world as a greedy heartless machine intent on destroying his soul so he would rather starve than compromise with these monsters. The pseudo-intellectual who writes "literary fiction" that is so dense and pretentious nobody but him can make any sense of it. The perfectionist who never gets past chapter three before going back to rework the start. Criticism from these types can do more harm than good.

And because of this diversity flame wars can break out on these sites over crits. Some people cannot take criticism and react as if personally attacked. It can get bitter and nasty. Writing is such a personal thing, it's hard to take personality out of the equation altogether. (I'm more a sulker, really. Too much of a wimp to start an argument.)

There is often a trend towards conformity in these groups. Strong characters set the standard and everyone else falls into line. Before you know it your writing is being influenced by this trend and you're losing your individuality.

So, I would say join online peer review groups and take from them what you can, but beware of taking any critiques too seriously. Ultimately writing is a solitary activity.

Just a thought...

This month's target is to finish the mystery I've been working on for two years. This latest revision started out as a proofreading exercise and ended up with some major plot changes. I came unstuck last December trying to write the synopsis, I think realising that the middle section didn't have enough meat on it and more was needed. It's meant introducing two new characters so quite a major overhaul. But I'm starting to see the end, so it shouldn't be too long now.
I was intending to get cracking on the comic novel but I'm letting that cook a while longer, although I have some ideas. It might end up being a play, in fact. I haven't decided.
It's not that easy to divide your attention. For a while I was writing one book in the morning and revising another one in the afternoon but I don't know whether I'd try it again. It takes me a while to get into the mind set of a book, and switching between them is a bit of a stretch. I suppose if you're working to a deadline you have no choice.
One thing I'm planning to include in the new story is a peer review group, because I think there's lots of scope for comedy in these crits. Here is a sample:

Hi Wetwarbler, here are my thoughts about your piece. I loved it really, you have a marvellous talent although perhaps not for writing. But anyway please take or leave this crit as you see fit; it is only my opinion and I'm sure you'll find someone who'll enjoy it sooner or later.

I loved the opening sentence. I could just picture him on the chimney stack in his wife's underwear, but would it perhaps be better to make his sexuality less obvious? Keep the reader guessing? Just a thought. Your description of the bun fight was a bit long at seven pages, you could easily cut it down to a paragraph, or even a sentence, or even cut it altogether. Is it really necessary at all? Just a thought.
I got a bit confused in chapter two. I couldn't help wondering why Colonel Molotov kept asking Agnethe to dance. Is that feasible in a life raft? And didn't she die in chapter one? Or were there two Agnethes? Probably best not to have two or more characters with the same name. Just a thought.
I'm not sure most people would get the Chaucerian references in chapter three, and they do tend to confuse the issue in the rape scene. Out of interest, have you checked whether it is possible to get eight people into the boot of a mini metro?

Peer Review Sites - good or bad?

The voice in my head - you know the one that constantly nags and nags - tells me it is time I added another post. I hear and obey, oh Master! (Right you can cut that out for a start.)

So following on from the last entry, I was wondering about peer review sites and whether they are a good or bad thing. I've experienced a few in the last five years and I have mixed feelings about them. Like any writer's group, they seem to attract a peculiar species who want to set the Rules of Writing in stone, but really it's just a way of formalising the rules of belonging to the group. If you disagree you will find yourself sidelined pretty quick, and it's not a nice feeling however much you pretend you don't care.

Support groups are great, don't get me wrong. The trouble is when it goes further and becomes an exclusive clique. I've witness some particularly nasty bullying and playground behaviour on some sites, and the price I paid for objecting to it was being kicked out. Ah well. I suppose some individuals never grow out of this behaviour the way the majority do. In the words of the seventies icon but now disgraced pop-star, Gary Glitter: "Dyou wanna be in my gang, my gang, my gang..."