McAnally's (The Community Pub) > Author Craft

critics and critisism - a love/hate relationship.

(1/4) > >>

Kristine:
I'm out here in Southern California so every other person is an actor or writing a screenplay (that they will later direct) - most other places in the country-every other person is writing short stories or a novel, so I found this article ...interesting.

Now I believe critical opinions are like buttholes - everyone has one but no one really wants to hear someone elses....

After reading this article tell us how you go about getting critical evaluations; how do you get good ones and your stories about finding a good or bad critic in the past.  How thick skinned do you have to be?  and do you think this author's point is valid when it comes to the arts.

I Will Not Read Your Fucking Script
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/i_will_not_read.php

--- Quote ---...If that seems unfair, I'll make you a deal. In return for you not asking me to read your fucking script, I will not ask you to wash my fucking car, or take my fucking picture, or represent me in fucking court, or take out my fucking gall bladder, or whatever the fuck it is that you do for a living.

...

Now, I normally have a standard response to people who ask me to read their scripts, and it's the simple truth: I have two piles next to my bed. One is scripts from good friends, and the other is manuscripts and books and scripts my agents have sent to me that I have to read for work. Every time I pick up a friend's script, I feel guilty that I'm ignoring work. Every time I pick something up from the other pile, I feel guilty that I'm ignoring my friends. If I read yours before any of that, I'd be an awful person.

Most people get that. But sometimes you find yourself in a situation where the guilt factor is really high, or someone plays on a relationship or a perceived obligation, and it's hard to escape without seeming rude. Then, I tell them I'll read it, but if I can put it down after ten pages, I will. They always go for that, because nobody ever believes you can put their script down once you start....

It rarely takes more than a page to recognize that you're in the presence of someone who can write, but it only takes a sentence to know you're dealing with someone who can't.

(By the way, here's a simple way to find out if you're a writer. If you disagree with that statement, you're not a writer. Because, you see, writers are also readers.) ...

You may want to allow for the fact that this fellow had never written a synopsis before, but that doesn't excuse the inability to form a decent sentence, or an utter lack of facility with language and structure. The story described was clearly of great importance to him, but he had done nothing to convey its specifics to an impartial reader. What I was handed was, essentially, a barely coherent list of events, some connected, some not so much. Characters wander around aimlessly, do things for no reason, vanish, reappear, get arrested for unnamed crimes, and make wild, life-altering decisions for no reason. Half a paragraph is devoted to describing the smell and texture of a piece of food, but the climactic central event of the film is glossed over in a sentence. The death of the hero is not even mentioned. One sentence describes a scene he's in, the next describes people showing up at his funeral. I could go on, but I won't. This is the sort of thing that would earn you a D minus in any Freshman Comp class.

Which brings us to an ugly truth about many aspiring screenwriters: They think that screenwriting doesn't actually require the ability to write, just the ability to come up with a cool story that would make a cool movie. Screenwriting is widely regarded as the easiest way to break into the movie business, because it doesn't require any kind of training, skill or equipment. Everybody can write, right? And because they believe that, they don't regard working screenwriters with any kind of real respect. They will hand you a piece of inept writing without a second thought, because you do not have to be a writer to be a screenwriter
​
So. I read the thing. And it hurt, man. It really hurt. I was dying to find something positive to say, and there was nothing. And the truth is, saying something positive about this thing would be the nastiest, meanest and most dishonest thing I could do. Because here's the thing: not only is it cruel to encourage the hopeless, but you cannot discourage a writer. If someone can talk you out of being a writer, you're not a writer. If I can talk you out of being a writer, I've done you a favor, because now you'll be free to pursue your real talent, whatever that may be. And, for the record, everybody has one. The lucky ones figure out what that is. The unlucky ones keep on writing shitty screenplays and asking me to read them.

To make matters worse, this guy (and his girlfriend) had begged me to be honest with him. He was frustrated by the responses he'd gotten from friends, because he felt they were going easy on him, and he wanted real criticism. They never do, of course. What they want is a few tough notes to give the illusion of honesty, and then some pats on the head. What they want--always--is encouragement, even when they shouldn't get any.
Do you have any idea how hard it is to tell someone that they've spent a year wasting their time? Do you know how much blood and sweat goes into that criticism? Because you want to tell the truth, but you want to make absolutely certain that it comes across honestly and without cruelty. I did more rewrites on that fucking e-mail than I did on my last three studio projects.

My first draft was ridiculous. I started with specific notes, and after a while, found I'd written three pages on the first two paragraphs. That wasn't the right approach. So I tossed it, and by the time I was done, I'd come up with something that was relatively brief, to the point, and considerate as hell. The main point I made was that he'd fallen prey to a fallacy that nails a lot of first timers. He was way more interested in telling his one story than in being a writer. It was like buying all the parts to a car and starting to build it before learning the basics of auto mechanics. You'll learn a lot along the way, I said, but you'll never have a car that runs.

(I should mention that while I was composing my response, he pulled the ultimate amateur move, and sent me an e-mail saying, "If you haven't read it yet, don't! I have a new draft. Read this!" In other words, "The draft I told you was ready for professional input, wasn't actually.")

I advised him that if all he was interested in was this story, he should find a writer and work with him; or, if he really wanted to be a writer, start at the beginning and take some classes, and start studying seriously.

And you know what? I shouldn't have bothered. Because for all the hair I pulled out, for all the weight and seriousness I gave his request for a real, professional critique, his response was a terse "Thanks for your opinion." And, the inevitable fallout--a week later a mutual friend asked me, "What's this dick move I hear you pulled on Whatsisname?"

You are not owed a read from a professional, even if you think you have an in, and even if you think it's not a huge imposition. It's not your choice to make. This needs to be clear--when you ask a professional for their take on your material, you're not just asking them to take an hour or two out of their life, you're asking them to give you--gratis--the acquired knowledge, insight, and skill of years of work. It is no different than asking your friend the house painter to paint your living room during his off hours.

There's a great story about Pablo Picasso. Some guy told Picasso he'd pay him to draw a picture on a napkin. Picasso whipped out a pen and banged out a sketch, handed it to the guy, and said, "One million dollars, please."

"A million dollars?" the guy exclaimed. "That only took you thirty seconds!"

"Yes," said Picasso. "But it took me fifty years to learn how to draw that in thirty seconds."
--- End quote ---

Aludra:
I think his point is valid. You don't ask your doctor friend to look at your rash at a party, and neither should you ask your writer friend to look at your scripts.  If they offer, great, but there have to be proper avenues for that sort of thing.  Like workshops or classes.  And his Picasso reference strikes home for more than just the arts.  Just because a scientist can answer a question in a small amount of time doesn't mean that it didn't require 20 years of training for him to be able to do it.

Shecky:
Heh. Reminds me of the times when I met Person A, who, upon hearing that I'm a translator (French-English and vice versa), says something to the effect of, "Oh! I've got this huge stack of letters from my great-uncle to my great-grandmother / magazine articles a colleague sent me / videos / etc. Give your phone number and address and I'll bring them around to you." No mention whatsoever of pay, of course. I don't mind stuff like "I've always wondered what _____ means", but if it's something that's going to take hours or days, how much nerve do you have to suggest you can just dump it on me and I'll do it out of the goodness of my heart? PAY UP, cheap bastard.

Starbeam:
I've had some pretty stupid critique comments.  On a sentence with something like coals smoldering in a brazier, I was asked if a brazier was a brassiere.  And another person tried to imply I needed to rename the elves in my fantasy story because Tolkien's elves were Sylvan elves.(They're not.)  Along with tons of other nitpicky comments.  But that one I think was cause I commented that his story was very obviously an overused fantasy cliche--evil overlord orphans kid who runs away and joins up with a mentor that gives him a magical item that allows him to kill evil overlord when he grows up--and also that one completely unnecessary scene really made me wonder--dog straining against his collar, with an obvious hardon, for a naked woman chained up closeby.  Really, it was a minor detail in a scene where the evil overlord is looking over the parents in the dungeon before having them killed.  But one that makes you go WTF? 

I just wish I hadn't torn up the copy with that guy's comments.  They'd probably make me laugh.

belial.1980:

Back in the day I used to post stories for critique on Critters, a website devoted to Sci-fi/fantasy/horror writers. You could post your work and get critiques in exchange for critiquing other peoples' work. Here are some snippets from a critique I received back in December of 07 (Sad but yes I still have all those old emails to reference):


I don’t like the main character one bit.  There is nothing noble, ormothe
even good about him that makes me care.  He is a violent, murdering,
SOB that gets off on killing and desecrates the dead.  He needs to
rot in hell for his actions, yet you give him new life at the end as
a wolf.  There are no righteous ramifications for his actions, no
consequences. Am I missing some hidden theme here?

Glorification of violence may win you some admirers, but not me.
It’s all very 300, a movie which I though laughable.


The ugly, fat wife is interesting.  To bad she was axed.

(Here I go again.)  As a mother - and a human being for God’s sake -
I couldn’t read the disturbing details of the children’s and wife’s
deaths.  It is tactless.  I skimmed through that part.  Like I said,
I absolutely would have stopped reading this if it was in a magazine
or book.  But it was for critters, so I persevered.  I’m curious if
other critters thought this way, or just me.  I am simply one person
so you can trash my critique, burn it, flush it, whatever.

I thought, overall, the critique was a little harsh and that the reader took the story a little too personally.
But here is my reply, cut directly from the email I sent her:

Thanks so much for taking the time to look at my story. I appreciate your critique and will take all your suggestions to heart for my second draft.

Granted, the first draft of the story she reviewed for me wasn't so hot, LOL. 

I think it's easy to get personally involved in something you've created. I'd like to think that I put a little bit of myself into everything I write. When someone doesn't like a story you've put your heart into it's easy to make the jump and take it as a personal stab. But I think you have to be thick-skinned and take it objectively. Sometimes critics are lame-brained but when I write a story and get feedback I think of myself as an architect. Just like an architect should be aware of any structural weaknesses in a building they've designed I should be aware of inherent weaknesses in my story. 


I agree with the writer of that article. If that other guy was serious about writing good screen plays instead of saying, "That's your opinion" he could've asked for suggestions on improving his writing and asked what he could've done better for next time.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page