When do you know if what you have written is any good?

[Smuttyandfun]

Sometimes I have an inkling, especially when I've put a lot into a story. The readers will let me know if it worked or not, usually with a positive comments.

 

[ChloeTzang]

When do you know if what you have written is any good?

LOL. When someone emails me and tells me they stayed up until 5am in the morning on a week night to finish reading my story because they couldn't put it down! That's my target spot. Reader glued to the story and unable to stop reading until it's done, and then asking for more. THAT is when I know it's good!

 

[SemiStraight]

If I get hard when I'm proofing it and I'm anxious to get it done. Thankfully my taste and my audiences usually coincides. I've been a little surprised by the popularity of a few of them but pleased.

 

[000zing]

When you're happy with it.

Unless your commercial instinct is set to critical, the only yardstick is your own satisfaction. Oh and, above all, pay no heed to a forum which is in the majority self-congratulatory and cliquey, thereby eliminating any objectivity you may seek to impute to it.

 

[ElectricBlue]

When you're happy with it.

Unless your commercial instinct is set to critical, the only yardstick is your own satisfaction. Oh and, above all, pay no heed to a forum which is in the majority self-congratulatory and cliquey, thereby eliminating any objectivity you may seek to impute to it.

I dunno. I'd be more inclined to take input from people who have actually written a word or two and published it here, than cynical commentary from someone who's not got a thing published on this website. Put your words where your mouth is, sunshine, then come back and tell us all how to write.

 

[000zing]

I dunno. I'd be more inclined to take input from people who have actually written a word or two and published it here, than cynical commentary from someone who's not got a thing published on this website. Put your words where your mouth is, sunshine, then come back and tell us all how to write.

And shazzam... the Clique Police arrives hotfoot from slapping backs (amazing it can tear itself away) complete with the usual set of insults and casual assumptions.

"Papiere, bitte" will doubtless be following in its wake...

 

[ElectricBlue]

... and casual assumptions.

Okay then - show us your writing skills, put yourself on display, as we here all have.

It's a fair and reasonable request. Put your money where your mouth is. Then we can judge you, just as you have judged all of us.

 

[Voboy]

And shazzam... the Clique Police arrives hotfoot from slapping backs (amazing it can tear itself away) complete with the usual set of insults and casual assumptions.

"Papiere, bitte" will doubtless be following in its wake...

Other than an ad-hominem, do you have a response on point?

I thought the critique was pretty valid. What reason have you given the OP to view your opinion any more favorably than people who've published?

 

[Blind_Justice]

After ten years of doing this writing smut for fun and no profit thing, I should have gained a sense for the quality of my writing, but, like my eyesight, my sense for quality is severely lacking. Some things that I find absolutely brilliant get weird looks and "what's that supposed to be?" remarks from my critics and beta readers, while stuff I find boring, drawn-out and way too convoluted for its own good earns praise and encouragement.

Thus, many rewrites and passable scores on here. Not fun at times.

Edit: I've been doing this for HOW FUCKING LONG? And why hasn't Netflix called yet? I mean, they turn ANYTHING into a series, right? I'm pretty sure "Express Delivery" would make for some nice TV...

Just kidding. I know I'm way too niche for a mainstream audience.

 

[Auden James]

As to SamScribble's original question I think the answer pretty much depends on one's understanding of key terms also to be found in his original post: "good," "satisfy," "successful writer," "know their stuff." There are several possible understandings of any one of these terms, hence any response to SamScribble's original question may very well be predicated on one's understanding of any or all of these terms.

Also I'm wondering what SamScribble thinks there is to gain from the answers given here in light of the uncertainty of meaning of key terms of any plain answer oblivious to this uncertainty?

But even if you take the answers provided by respondents who at least tried to clear up a little their understanding of key terms like "good," e.g., ChloeTzang stating that someone emailing her and telling her that they stayed up until 5 a.m. in the morning on a week night to finish reading her story means it's good, then these still leave me mostly puzzled, for I cannot help wondering how respondents like ChloeTzang whose understanding of "good" writing entirely depends on their reader reactions after publication are able to even finish writing any story at all as already during the writing process before publication the writer has to make innumerable decisions that ultimately determine the quality of the outcome of their writing process, viz. their finished story, that this answer—taken at face value—would pretty much mean that writers like ChloeTzang write their stories flying blind, so to speak, without having any clue while writing whether what they are writing adds up to anything or nothing at all. So how then do they make these innummerable, but inevitable decisions that ultimately determine the quality of their writing? Do they just roll the dice? Do they just don't care? Why then not simply use a suitable algorithm to string together words and sentences and add a "written by X" under the title and it call it a day? It would pretty much mean doing the same freaking thing!

Thus, as I hope I've made clear, I don't think there's really anything to gain from answering SamScribble's original question because there are simply much more fundamental questions which need to be answered first before any meaningful or coherent answer can be given to the question SamScribble—for whatever reason—wants to see answered here.

 

[Bramblethorn]

But even if you take the answers provided by respondents who at least tried to clear up a little their understanding of key terms like "good," e.g., ChloeTzang stating that someone emailing her and telling her that they stayed up until 5 a.m. in the morning on a week night to finish reading her story means it's good, then these still leave me mostly puzzled, for I cannot help wondering how respondents like ChloeTzang whose understanding of "good" writing entirely depends on their reader reactions after publication are able to even finish writing any story at all as already during the writing process before publication the writer has to make innumerable decisions that ultimately determine the quality of the outcome of their writing process, viz. their finished story, that this answer—taken at face value—would pretty much mean that writers like ChloeTzang write their stories flying blind, so to speak, without having any clue while writing whether what they are writing adds up to anything or nothing at all.

If you think a bit more about that "flying blind" metaphor, you may see why this argument doesn't hold up.

When I step into an airplane, nobody can measure the success of that journey until the end of the process, when we all find out whether the plane crashes or lands safely. But that doesn't mean the pilot is "flying blind". It just means that the method used to measure success is not identical to the method used to achieve it.

 

[Auden James]

When I step into an airplane, nobody can measure the success of that journey until the end of the process, when we all find out whether the plane crashes or lands safely. But that doesn't mean the pilot is "flying blind".

Exactly, as in terms of the metaphor of "flying blind" I wasn't talking about just anybody stepping into an airplane, but about the pilot piloting the freaking thing because it's the decisions the pilot makes at any given moment of the flight that determine whether the journey will come to a "good" (safe landing) or "bad" (crash) ending.

It just means that the method used to measure success is not identical to the method used to achieve it.

Please also note that neither I nor ChloeTzang were talking about "success" in this context, but about "good" writing. As I see it you're making two subtle but erroneous substitutions here, first in misrepresenting the metaphor's content or "gist" and then again in changing the terms in question.

 

[EarlyMorningLight]

As to SamScribble's original question I think the answer pretty much depends on one's understanding of key terms also to be found in his original post: "good," "satisfy," "successful writer," "know their stuff." There are several possible understandings of any one of these terms, hence any response to SamScribble's original question may very well be predicated on one's understanding of any or all of these terms.

Also I'm wondering what SamScribble thinks there is to gain from the answers given here in light of the uncertainty of meaning of key terms of any plain answer oblivious to this uncertainty?

But even if you take the answers provided by respondents who at least tried to clear up a little their understanding of key terms like "good," e.g., ChloeTzang stating that someone emailing her and telling her that they stayed up until 5 a.m. in the morning on a week night to finish reading her story means it's good, then these still leave me mostly puzzled, for I cannot help wondering how respondents like ChloeTzang whose understanding of "good" writing entirely depends on their reader reactions after publication are able to even finish writing any story at all as already during the writing process before publication the writer has to make innumerable decisions that ultimately determine the quality of the outcome of their writing process, viz. their finished story, that this answer—taken at face value—would pretty much mean that writers like ChloeTzang write their stories flying blind, so to speak, without having any clue while writing whether what they are writing adds up to anything or nothing at all. So how then do they make these innummerable, but inevitable decisions that ultimately determine the quality of their writing? Do they just roll the dice? Do they just don't care? Why then not simply use a suitable algorithm to string together words and sentences and add a "written by X" under the title and it call it a day? It would pretty much mean doing the same freaking thing!

Thus, as I hope I've made clear, I don't think there's really anything to gain from answering SamScribble's original question because there are simply much more fundamental questions which need to be answered first before any meaningful or coherent answer can be given to the question SamScribble—for whatever reason—wants to see answered here.

There are ways of answering this that don’t rely on universal definitions though. I replied that I judge my own work by whether or not I think a piece achieves what I set out to achieve. Many writers mention having trusted readers who they use as barometers. Neither of these methods require absolute common values for “good” but they’re still useful methods.

 

[SamScribble]

As to SamScribble's original question I think the answer pretty much depends on one's understanding of key terms also to be found in his original post: "good," "satisfy," "successful writer," "know their stuff." There are several possible understandings of any one of these terms, hence any response to SamScribble's original question may very well be predicated on one's understanding of any or all of these terms.

Also I'm wondering what SamScribble thinks there is to gain from the answers given here in light of the uncertainty of meaning of key terms of any plain answer oblivious to this uncertainty?

To be honest, I wasn’t too worried about any absolute understandings of the terms ‘good’, ‘satisfy’, ‘successful writer’ or ‘know their stuff’. For the purpose of the questions, they can mean whatever they mean to the person who is answering the questions. In any discussion like this, words mean what they mean to the person using them.

Almost 60 years ago, when I first started to be published reasonably frequently, I was confident that I knew what most words in everyday use meant. I knew the meaning of ‘unique’ and ‘utilise’ and ‘anticipate’. I also knew that that ‘obsolete’ and ‘obsolescent’ had distinctly different, but related, meanings. But now, ‘unique’, ‘utilise’, and ‘’anticipate’ have all acquired different meanings, and ‘obsolete’ and ‘obsolescent’ tend to be used as though they both meant the same thing. Meanings change not just with time, but also from person to person. I think we just need to keep that in mind when we are considering their answers.

 

[000zing]

Other than an ad-hominem, do you have a response on point?

I thought the critique was pretty valid. What reason have you given the OP to view your opinion any more favorably than people who've published?

Yet more casual assuming. Where have I asked the OP to do that? Come on... you have imputed to me an agenda... justify your claim. I shall not be holding my breath, frankly.

OP, I apologise - unlike the clique - for the sidetracking. You asked a fair question and I gave an honest answer. Once again, the clique descends on us with its claim that only those who have "published" (forgive any hilarity) on here and engaged like frenetic worker ants in its tangled comedy of "likes" etc. can be allowed commentary. Needless to say, any negative commentary regarding the general standard of story writing on the site is specifically hated, as they believe that this tends to show them in a bad light.

You saw my answer. I believe it to be the only one possible given the very general nature of your enquiry, but you must reach your own decision. As you say, a very small "review panel" of selected people - if you feel you absolutely must seek outside judgement - would be one way to go.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Usually when I leave the draft for a week or more, return to it, and think "that's good!" Unfortunately that usually applies to individual sentences and paragraphs, with other bits causing my reading flow to stutter. So I then try to fix those. Then I'll try to skim read looking at the structure - is there too much or too little writing at certain points in the story? Balancing those is the trickiest, I find, especially when using characters that I and some readers will already know, but others need to be introduced to.

Once published, literate comments are good. Much more than the score - scores tend to relate much more to whether you met the expectations of most readers, and despite disclaimers I often don't do that. Compliments from authors I rate are a good sign, but I appreciate comments from readers who clearly got what I was aiming for - "I don't normally like ... but your characters were compelling so I had to read the whole story and loved it", ideally.

But really I then need a year or two to forget most of the story, then re-read. Then I can tell whether it stands up. Usually it mostly works but there's parts I'd re-write if aiming to publish elsewhere.

 

[Voboy]

Once again, the clique descends on us with its claim that only those who have "published" (forgive any hilarity) on here and engaged like frenetic worker ants in its tangled comedy of "likes" etc. can be allowed commentary. Needless to say, any negative commentary regarding the general standard of story writing on the site is specifically hated, as they believe that this tends to show them in a bad light.

I didn't say "only those who've published can be allowed commentary." I asked why the OP should lend your opinion any weight, vs those who've done so. Because the OP can see, read, and judge their work and compare it to their reply, but cannot do so with you.

Scroll back up, take a look at what I wrote, and work on your reading comprehension. You're very quick to take offense when none is intended. I did take you seriously, but I think I'll stop doing that now.

Have a nice weekend!

 

[Bramblethorn]

Exactly, as in terms of the metaphor of "flying blind" I wasn't talking about just anybody stepping into an airplane, but about the pilot piloting the freaking thing because it's the decisions the pilot makes at any given moment of the flight that determine whether the journey will come to a "good" (safe landing) or "bad" (crash) ending.

As I said, "When I step into an airplane, nobody can measure the success of that journey until the end of the process, when we all find out". If clarification is needed here, the word "nobody" implies "not even the pilot", and "all" implies "including the pilot".

Even the pilot doesn't know for certain whether they're going to land or crash, until the flight is over. And yet they still have a pretty good idea of what kinds of decisions improve the chance of a good outcome.

Please also note that neither I nor ChloeTzang were talking about "success" in this context, but about "good" writing. As I see it you're making two subtle but erroneous substitutions here, first in misrepresenting the metaphor's content or "gist" and then again in changing the terms in question.

I'm not sure I see the importance of the distinction you're drawing here. In this context, I'd consider "success in writing" and "writing a good story" to be more or less interchangeable language. But if that distinction does matter to you, please feel free to suppose that I used "good" instead of "success" above.

 

[000zing]

I didn't say "only those who've published can be allowed commentary." I asked why the OP should lend your opinion any weight, vs those who've done so. Because the OP can see, read, and judge their work and compare it to their reply, but cannot do so with you.

Scroll back up, take a look at what I wrote, and work on your reading comprehension. You're very quick to take offense when none is intended. I did take you seriously, but I think I'll stop doing that now.

Have a nice weekend!

No, you asked why I expected the OP to consider my views "MORE favorably" than those of others, as anyone who views your post #34 can plainly see. This twisting of facts to suit your case is typical of the clique and shows what its arguments are worth. You've been caught out.

You're becoming tedious, so on ignore you go.

 

[Voboy]

No, you asked why I expected the OP to consider my views "MORE favorably" than those of others, as anyone who views your post #34 can plainly see. This twisting of facts to suit your case is typical of the clique and shows what its arguments are worth. You've been caught out.

You're becoming tedious, so on ignore you go.

My goodness.

Probably best for all concerned, I suppose.

 

[Mal_Bey]

I am a young writer, so I don't know the answer to the question completely yet, but here is what I know. I recently attempted to write my first multipart story. I copped out, and in my initial planning, just decided to do a "If you guys like this, I'll write more" postscript. That gave my the ability to defer my own self-judgement, and that was a mistake. As I wrote the tale, I figured out if I was going to write more in the tale, I needed a different ending than if I was going chicken out. So I had to make the decision without popular input, which is what I was tying to avoid all along. Panic ensued. After a week or more, I eventually had a moment of calm, and realized the self doubts were not warranted. The story was good enough I should choose to "write-to-continue." The story went on to score well.

 

[Smuttyandfun]

I am a young writer, so I don't know the answer to the question completely yet, but here is what I know. I recently attempted to write my first multipart story. I copped out, and in my initial planning, just decided to do a "If you guys like this, I'll write more" postscript. That gave my the ability to defer my own self-judgement, and that was a mistake. As I wrote the tale, I figured out if I was going to write more in the tale, I needed a different ending than if I was going chicken out. So I had to make the decision without popular input, which is what I was tying to avoid all along. Panic ensued. After a week or more, I eventually had a moment of calm, and realized the self doubts were not warranted. The story was good enough I should choose to "write-to-continue." The story went on to score well.

Glad to hear your story did well! I always second guess myself. Even if I think a story is good, I never know if it's going to work and the readers will like it. Guess all we do is keeping writing, because we enjoy it.

 

[Mal_Bey]

Second guessing is a primary writer's skill. In other applications, it is called self-editing. I don't know about you all, but my writing is a constant process of "is that last word/sentence/paragraph/scene good-enough?" It is perfectly normal to zoom out to questioning the whole story. You just have be brave enough to keep answering the question honestly.

 

[Smuttyandfun]

Sometimes, I have to step away from a story so I don't start picking it apart. If I read it too many times, I start to wonder if I should just put it aside, and look at it again later, so I don't start dissecting it.

 

[Duleigh]

For me, if it doesn't feel right I either lose interest or I find something to make it right. I was just about to walk away from my Nude day story until @Rustyoznail posted that the emphasis of the nude day stories is more public nudity than sex and suddenly my story changed direction and began flowing beautifully (for me anyhow) so you never know where the inspiration for your direction in the story will come from.