Silencing the voices

[MillieDynamite]

Who was it about before it turned to someone else? Because I can't remember.

Somehow this thread has become all about someone else.

Shocking.

 

[Statius]

Well, I guess as per the thread title, the voice has been actually silenced.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

The voices I want silenced are the ones in my head.

 

[StillStunned]

Well, I guess as per the thread title, the voice has been actually silenced.

Have the lambs stopped screaming?

 

[YmaOHyd]

The voices I want silenced are the ones in my head.

That's what the thread was originally about!

 

[Statius]

Have the lambs stopped screaming?

Not in my head

 

[MillieDynamite]

@DEFCON5, I sort of remember that.

Well, I guess as per the thread title, the voice has been actually silenced.

 

[EmilyMiller]

@DEFCON5, I sort of remember that.

Who has been contributing to the thread - kinda bravely - it’s almost as if discussing aspects of writing on a writing forum is bad - if you’re not an ‘approved person,’ that is .

 

[Djmac1031]

Who has been contributing to the thread - kinda bravely - it’s almost as if discussing aspects of writing on a writing forum is bad - if you’re not an ‘approved person,’ that is .

Pay no attention to the cranky old man behind the curtain...

 

[old_prof]

OP asked that it no longer be about him.

 

[EmilyMiller]

OP asked that it no longer be about him.

Hey, stop using facts, wontcha? They are so inconvenient .

 

[MillieDynamite]

Well, the facts can get in the way of a good story.

Hey, stop using facts, wontcha? They are so inconvenient .

 

[EmilyMiller]

Well, the facts can get in the way of a good story.

Yup - pesky facts!

 

[EmilyMiller]

So anyway, writing and the creative process and whether that can ever be devoid of outside influences. Plus the evils of beta readers and how they will lead to the collapse of civilization (sorry @Voboy - as I say I understand your self-consistent stance fully).

 

[StillStunned]

So anyway, writing and the creative process and whether that can ever be devoid of outside influences

Whatever we create is already influenced by the same influences that shape us. If you could ever conceive of a human who wasn't ever, in any way, subjected to outside factors, I posit that they would be the least creative person ever.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Whatever we create is already influenced by the same influences that shape us. If you could ever conceive of a human who wasn't ever, in any way, subjected to outside factors, I posit that they would be the least creative person ever.

And I tend to agree with you. And also, readers want to connect. At least a sprinkling of relatability / universality helps with that.

 

[Voboy]

So anyway, writing and the creative process and whether that can ever be devoid of outside influences. Plus the evils of beta readers and how they will lead to the collapse of civilization (sorry @Voboy - as I say I understand your self-consistent stance fully).

I guess I see a difference between passive influences, which we incorporate into our memories and personalities, and active influences we pursue as we create whatever it is we create.

Say I'm writing about the middle ages, which I have. I do a lot of research for those, mostly using an online version of Domesday. That's "research," which I've now acquired, and then it becomes a part of the many things that influence the words I write. That's one level of "outside influence."

If I were then to submit those words to someone else, asking them for input specifically about how I've strung those words together, I'd look at that as a more active process by which I would be seeking to reassure myself about the words I'd chosen. I've never been a guy who doubts my ability to choose words, so I feel like I'm better off skipping that step; that way I feel I can take credit for whatever my story does well, and if it fails with the readers here? Well, I take the blame for that on myself. I don't get to point fingers. It's my failure, to learn from.

But it adds to the passive influence I've already incorporated, so that it can inform my next story. I think of passive influences as fine (because they're completely unavoidable) and active influences as something that won't benefit me, and might not benefit others. But that's for them to discover.

Either way, I try not to be prescriptive about it. I don't think there's any one way to write a story or conceptualize an idea. I know what works for me, but not what works for you. And I think that enriches all of us.

I only suggested the OP avoid betas here because I thought they were giving him trouble.

 

[Voboy]

Somehow this thread has become all about someone else.

Shocking.

Sure. It's become about several someone elses. That's the nature of how this place works, at its best. Quit being petty.

 

[EmilyMiller]

But it adds to the passive influence I've already incorporated, so that it can inform my next story. I think of passive influences as fine (because they're completely unavoidable) and active influences as something that won't benefit me, and might not benefit others. But that's for them to discover.

I see what you are saying, but don’t view it as being black and white. Are passive and active influences really that different? In both cases, it’s what other humans think.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Quit being petty.

As if

 

[Voboy]

I see what you are saying, but don’t view it as being black and white. Are passive and active influences really that different? In both cases, it’s what other humans think.

The active ones must be sought, the passive ones don't.

I admit it's a little bit arbitrary. Because I know you seek out research material, but that's not the same to me because the research informs what I CREATE. Once created, it's "there," it exists. And it's mine.

The search for active influences would start at that point. The act of creation is already done. I think of outside editing (and, I suppose, beta-read stories) as "re"-creating pieces, in a way, especially if they involve outsiders who weren't involved in the initial creation.

I'm aware some see betas/editing as a part of the process of creation, but I don't. I edit my own pieces by myself, and VERY minimally.

 

[alohadave]

The concerns about beta readers (and editors) changing your work/voice/whatever, sound a lot like the fears I had that therapy would force me to be someone else. Turns out that therapy isn't like that at all, and neither are beta readers.

I get that fear, but from my experience, it's not about changing you, it's getting a second opinion. You are asking an outsider to look at your work and tell you what they think of what you've written before you release it into the world. Many of us are way too close and emotionally involved in our stories and we cannot be rational about them. Having a second opinion from someone who has no investment in your story is not that different than having readers tell you what they think of your story, with the difference that your story isn't live and if they see something that needs tweaking, you can make that change.

A beta reader is not there to tell you to rewrite your stories, and if they do, stop using them. That's the role of a development/structural editor, and that's far earlier in the process.

Whether you follow up on any opinions is always up to you.

 

[Dodola]

I'm trying to understand, isn't a beta reader one who gives feedback about how a story made them feel, as opposed to an editor who gives feedback and suggests changes on the writing structure and plot?

Or, are they the same thing?

Legit question, I'm learning.

 

[Voboy]

Many of us are way too close and emotionally involved in our stories and we cannot be rational about them. Having a second opinion from someone who has no investment in your story is not that different than having readers tell you what they think of your story, with the difference that your story isn't live and if they see something that needs tweaking, you can make that change.

I think the reply is that, at that point, it's no longer "your" story as such. It's now a collaboration, even at a minor level. I'd not make a judgment call on whether that's a good thing or a bad thing; it's for every writer to figure out for themselves, I expect.

For myself, I'd at the VERY least offer public thanks as a foreword, unless the beta told me not to. I'm aware many people here do just that, and I applaud it.

 

[YmaOHyd]

I'm trying to understand, isn't a beta reader one who gives feedback about how a story made them feel, as opposed to an editor who gives feedback and suggests changes on the writing structure and plot?

Or, are they the same thing?

Legit question, I'm learning.

Conceptually, you're right. In practice, though, none of us are perfect and few of us have editors, so the two things blend together.