My First Story

[PacoFear]

Not all that bad really

Hi Heather,

Sorry your post became a battleground for what appears to be an old dispute.

I thought I'd add a different voice and offer a bit of encouragement. Your story, with some clean-up, struck me as the sort of thing (length, pace, content) that might be published in the Penthouse Letters magazines I used to slink off to my bedroom with after mooching from my Dad's collection when he wasn't looking. The tales were quick, graphic ones usually with the flavor of, "You won't believe the incredible sexual encounter I had this one time when... ."

Depending on what your aspirations were for your story, you can take my assessment as an insult or a compliment. Frankly, Penthouse Letters stories weren't bad and I quite enjoyed them. To my way of thinking, they were a little like eating ramen noodles - easily prepared and quite satisfying.

People will enjoy your ramen noodles, Heather, because you took the time to make them and because they're hungry. You should get some measure of satisfaction in that. I tend to anyway.

To stretch my shitty metaphor even further: at its best, I think this site provides an opportunity for beginning writers like you and me to get really good at making ramen noodles then steadily hone our skills until we're making more sophisticated cuisine.

Heather: I look forward to nibbling on your noodles until the day I find you've unleashed a three-course meal.

Jenny, Erica, CWatson & SR71plt: lay down your swords. You've long since won our respect. You've got mine anyway.

Auden James: your pseudo-intellectual babble is giving me a headache. Please invest your energy in your own writing. From the look of your other thread, you have work to do and we both know it.

Cheers all,

-PacoFear

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

heather, never ask to see my early attempts at erotica - at least I've deleted them from Word. It would take a trawl of the hard disc to find them and then I'd jump off the bridge.

You're not doing too bad so far.

Ha. Elf, you work at it too hard. I set up another account entirely and left the old crap up somewhere. I occasionally go back there, read and laugh in embarrasment.

 

[jeanvaljean23]

well what are u waitng for... post u r stories... believe me u'll get motivated...

 

[sr71plt]

The assertion that posters here sometimes make about claiming they write what isn't evident in the name they are posting in because they post their stories under another account name is a pile of crap connected with trying to enjoy validation without putting in the work to actually have it. It's an Internet game. Each poster's production claims are only valid in the name they are posting in.

 

[heather88xxx]

heather, never ask to see my early attempts at erotica - at least I've deleted them from Word. It would take a trawl of the hard disc to find them and then I'd jump off the bridge.

You're not doing too bad so far.

I wouldn't put someone that is helping me out in that kind of awkward position. Auden however, is a condescending asshole and that is the only reason why I made that request.

And as far as the bickering goes... I don't care if it happens on my thread or someone else's. I'm here to get help from whomever is willing and I appreciate all the input that I have received so far.

 

[heather88xxx]

I am typing my rewrite with all the insight that I have received and I'll have it up as soon as possible. Thanks everyone.

 

[CWatson]

When did I become an editor? I never said I was. I can write well when I want too because of the things I've learned reading this board for years. My advice is always the same advice I was given and the advice I've seen give to hundreds of others who write better than I.

...And that somehow makes you not an editor? How do you think I learned? I saw you tell a good truth and make a good point--which is what an editor does--and as far as I'm concerned, you thus have as much right to call yourself one as I have right to call you one (which is either "every right in the world", or "none at all", depending on how you wanna look at it). My apologies if I accidentally offended.

 

[sr71plt]

Well, you do offend those who actually trained and gathered the experience to be real editors, I might note. Editing is a profession, not something you just hang a shingle out for and then are good to go.

I think you are confusing "editor" with "second reader."

 

[_Lynn_]

Well, you do offend those who actually trained and gathered the experience to be real editors, I might note. Editing is a profession, not something you just hang a shingle out for and then are good to go.

I think you are confusing "editor" with "second reader."

I think if 'editing' here on Lit was a paid position, then 'training' would be necessary. But it's a volunteer position and I don't think Lit is going to pay to train people interested in helping others here.

So in your book I'm not an editor. According to the terminology Lit uses, I am. But if you prefer, you're welcome to pay for the training I need to become a 'real' editor.

 

[sr71plt]

I think if 'editing' here on Lit was a paid position, then 'training' would be necessary. But it's a volunteer position and I don't think Lit is going to pay to train people interested in helping others here.

So in your book I'm not an editor. According to the terminology Lit uses, I am. But if you prefer, you're welcome to pay for the training I need to become a 'real' editor.

Well, yes, you can effectively/helpfully be a reviewer or a second reader here. But, also yes, the site is making very loose with the word "editor"--and leaving a very false impression with those asking for help. When you been told you've gotten a doctor and it turns out it's the receptionist out in the waiting room, you're not really getting what you thought you were getting. (And most certainly you aren't if what you thought you were doing was developing your skills to the U.S./UK market level.)

There's certainly a sliding scale of accumulated skills and talents that would make a reviewer quite useful whether or not they had formal training as an editor, so someone who has learned the basics well and knows what tools to use--and actually uses them--can be very helpful.

Also, someone who has written a lot of erotica and has honed their writing in this can be very useful--especially in content--to someone wanting to develop their skills in writing erotica in the same subject areas. They can often be more helpful than a even a professional editor in an unrelated field--of, say, technical reports on widgets.

And, as I've already mentioned, readers of a subject area can be very (very) helpful in simply telling an author whether what they wrote clicked with and aroused them--especially if they can specify what and why.

But getting sweeping generalization, hard dogma, and "we always/never" advice from someone who is neither an editor nor actively writes erotica--and you are led to believe is an editor? No, that's bogus.

And, P.S., please remember that, contrary to what some are trying to paint on me, I'm the one on this board saying there's legtimately a very broad range of acceptable writer ability and reader interest on Lit., that we're not writing for the New Yorker here, and that a writer shouldn't be subjected to editorial scrutiny unless they want to be--they should be permitted to write what/how they like and share it with others who like to read what they write and think it's delivered well enough. (And that maybe people responding to a "how's this?" on the SF board should give a little thought to the reality that they aren't being asked how to put this in publishable form--90 percent of the time they are being asked to read it and vote it a 5)

 

[_Lynn_]

Well, yes, you can effectively/helpfully be a reviewer or a second reader here. But, also yes, the site is making very loose with the word "editor"--and leaving a very false impression with those asking for help. When you been told you've gotten a doctor and it turns out it's the receptionist out in the waiting room, you're not really getting what you thought you were getting.

There's certainly a sliding scale of accumulated skills and talents that would make a reviewer quite useful whether to not they had formal training as an editor, so someone who has learned the basics well and knows what tools to use--and actually uses them--can be very helpful.

Also, someone who has written a lot of erotica and has honed their writing in this can be very useful--especially in content--to someone wanting to develop their skills in writing erotica in the same subject areas. They can often be more helpful than a even a professional editor in an unrelated field--of, say, technical reports on widgets.

And, as I've already mentioned, readers of a subject area can be very (very) helpful in simply telling an author whether what they wrote clicked with and aroused them--especially if they can specify what and why.

But getting sweeping generalization, hard dogma, and "we always/never" advice from someone who is neither an editor or even who actively writes erotica--and you are led to believe is an editor? No, that's bogus.

And, P.S., please remember that, contrary to what some are trying to paint on me, I'm the one on this board saying there's legtimately a very broad range of acceptable writer ability and reader interest on Lit., that we're not writing for the New Yorker here, and that a writer shouldn't be subjected to editorial scrutiny unless they want to be.

So now I'm curious where you place me on that sliding scale.

And I've told you before I agree with much of what you say. Which might not get me any extra brownie points around here, but what the hell, I'm allergic to chocolate anyway.

 

[sr71plt]

So now I'm curious where you place me on that sliding scale.

And I've told you before I agree with much of what you say. Which might not get me any extra brownie points around here, but what the hell, I'm allergic to chocolate anyway.

I could only answer that in a general way as I don't see your work directly. First, though, I think some separation needs to be done. The work being done by the volunteer helpers on Lit. isn't the same thing as postings to the SF board. One is intense one-on-one and privately worked out. The SF is an entirely different animal from that. (And I've added something to the bottom of my earlier posting on this since you read it).

But you do answer questions on the Editors board and do so showing a good grasp of both editing principals and the ethics of providing editorial advice. And you ask questions when you don't feel solid with your knowledge--which is something an editor does throughout his/her career. And appear to look things up in the authorities rather than rely on what your aunt's high school teacher may or may not have said. And you obviously are well-received by writers who have sought volunteer help. You were voted editor of the year last year, if I remember correctly--and I see that you have several nominations this year too.

(Of course, I can only give limited credence to what the "clients" at Lit. say, as my observation is that they can be pretty dumb about believing whatever they are told by whoever tells them here--and leaning more to believing someone with an arousing avatar than someone who actually cites authoritative sources for their advice. Writers on Lit. seem gleeful about sacrificing their babies, their stories, to some sort of popularity poll. You've sort of got to experience the Internet games a lot to understand this idiocy.)

But, having responded to your questions, let me leave you with one. You don't see folks putting out shingles here as Voluntary Editors who just make your toes curl at their obvious unpreparedness to do this--the blinder leading the blind--and make you want to slap them around and ask how they dare to bamboozle writers seeking good advice by just acting like they know what they are doing?

Imagine what a professional editor feels when they see this. (Which is why when I see crap being peddled as cream cheese on this board, I say something--even when I know the personal-attack knives are going to be unsheathed.)

 

[_Lynn_]

I could only answer that in a general way as I don't see your work directly. First, though, I think some separation needs to be done. The work being done by the volunteer helpers on Lit. isn't the same thing as postings to the SF board. One is intense one-on-one and privately worked out. The SF is an entirely different animal from that. (And I've added something to the bottom of my earlier posting on this since you read it).

But you do answer questions on the Editors board and do so showing a good grasp of both editing principals and the ethics of providing editorial advice. And you ask questions when you don't feel solid with your knowledge--which is something an editor does throughout his/her career. And appear to look things up in the authorities rather than rely on what your aunt's high school teacher may or may not have said. And you obviously are well-received by writers who have sought volunteer help. You were voted editor of the year last year, if I remember correctly--and I see that you have several nominations this year too.

(Of course, I can only give limited credence to what the "clients" at Lit. say, as my observation is that they can be pretty dumb about believing whatever they are told by whoever tells them here--and leaning more to believing someone with an arousing avatar than someone who actually cites authoritative sources for their advice. Writers on Lit. seem gleeful about sacrificing their babies, their stories, to some sort of popularity poll. You've sort of got to experience the Internet games a lot to understand this idiocy.)

But, having responded to your questions, let me leave you with one. You don't see folks putting out shingles here as Voluntary Editors who just make your toes curl at their obvious unpreparedness to do this--the blinder leading the blind--and make you want to slap them around and ask how they dare to bamboozle writers seeking good advice by just acting like they know what they are doing?

Image what a professional editor feels when they see this. (Which is why when I see crap being peddled as cream cheese on this board, I say something--even when I know the personal-attack knives are going to be unsheathed.)

Very true, the SF differs from one-on-one help. By working with the same authors, I learn their style, strengths, and weaknesses. The first few times I leave comments, suggestions, and tips. Later it becomes a comfortable working relationship. When someone asks for feedback here, it's a one-time deal. They don't know me or my style, just as I don't know theirs.

I do think many of those posting in the SF are looking for votes. But some truly want to improve. Some days it's simple to figure out what they want. I can assure you that my replying to a request in the SF does not guarantee their story gets a '5' vote by any means.

Thank you for the compliments. I work hard to do my best. Yes, I was editor of the year for 2008. And you're right that I have been nominated again for 2009.

An arousing AV? Oh my, I would never . . . okay, forget that part.

So your question. In a word? Yes. Flat out yes. There are some who make me cringe. I've seen pieces 'edited' already that had tons of mistakes in them yet. Simple things like punctuation and typos too. Doing a good 'edit' takes time. This isn't a race to see who can do the most pages in a night.

A professional, seeing some of the stories here, must want to rip the pages into pieces.


(Hoping I answered it all)

 

[sr71plt]

A professional, seeing some of the stories here, must want to rip the pages into pieces.

They mostly want to rip the charlatans apart who represented themselves to the writers as experts to be followed/obeyed. Which leads us back to the top of this ongoing "discussion."

 

[_Lynn_]

They mostly want to rip the charlatans apart who represented themselves to the writers as experts to be followed/obeyed. Which leads us back to the top of this ongoing "discussion."

Ah, but we had a discussion. The top of this is a "discussion".

 

[sr71plt]

Ah, but we had a discussion. The top of this is a "discussion".

OK, point to you.

Speaking of which, I really wonder if I'm going to be able to stay awake to watch the Australian Tennis Open final live tonight. I managed the women's final last night (and got to bed at 0630), but this one should go on much longer.

And having already downed my second glass of Shiraz, I'm not sure what else to try to keep me awake (beyond editing this Science Fiction book I've got to do).

 

[_Lynn_]

OK, point to you.

Speaking of which, I really wonder if I'm going to be able to stay awake to watch the Australian Tennis Open final live tonight. I managed the women's final last night (and got to bed at 0630), but this one should go on much longer.

And having already downed my second glass of Shiraz, I'm not sure what else to try to keep me awake (beyond editing this Science Fiction book I've got to do).

Well, you could do my homework for me. The topic is Categorizing Fallacies.

 

[sr71plt]

Well, you could do my homework for me. The topic is Categorizing Fallacies.

Chances are good that I couldn't.

 

[_Lynn_]

Chances are good that I couldn't.

Well, since I don't have a TV to watch tennis on, and I can't have alcohol, that leaves the homework. Chances are I'll figure it out too. I can't ruin my GPA.


ETA: Homework turned in.

 

[adriyanna62]

I read a thread that said these topics rarely find what you're looking for, but I figured it's worth a try.What I am looking for is a story about a teacher that goes to a party held by his students. I think it's in a barn and everyone is wearing masks. He seems reluctant to be there. I never got to finish the story and it sticks out in my mind for some reason. I think it will bother me for eternity if I don't finish reading it. Does anyone know of the story I'm talking about?
__________________________________________________
Hotel London

 

[txstanford]

@Heather: I hope you can bring this back to the table soon.

The story idea is appealing, but there's the old familiar structural problem of the bigger the cast, the more difficult it is for the major players to enjoy the narrative room they deserve.

I think you could do without the off-stage boyfriend: there's no substance there, only shadow, and a vaguely irritating one at that. The stupid-guys-in-the-tub scene seems only to demonstrate how stupid such stupid-guys-in-the-tub can be. They don't impact on her life or change it in any way.

Bringing the story into close-focus by reducing the cast list to just three would allow you, the writer, to delve much more deeply into each character's psyche and enable us, the readers, to embrace them more firmly.

For a first draft effort though, by an author to whom English isn't her first language --and in a genre notorious for its pitfalls -- I'd say the girl's done pretty darn good.

Just my two cents, Heather.

@ Auden:

"In fact, I question the idea of a special 'right to critique', though prooving it (however small its authority may be (if it even exists), for the strenght of this authority would be solely based on the obtained acceptance by as much readers (and thus other critics, too) as possible) can only be done by giving reasond value jugdements based on a higher concept than the mundane private sense -- which, of course, could also be approved by a majority of people, thus giving the respective 'critique' a strong authority simply because the majority of people share the critic's opinion."

I'm thinking you must really have been having a bad day when you brought that forth into the world.

One sentence; 100 words.

Not something any editor I know would want to leave hanging around cyberspace.