"I try to avoid extreme negativity about me or my ventures (and also extreme positivity). Both can burrow into your heart and paralyze you."
When I read that my first reaction was along the lines of "Huh. I wonder why extreme positivity would be so bad." But it actually only took me a minute or so to come up with a few possible scenarios.
The one that speaks most to me is that there's a risk in being too willing to listen to the people that give unconditional praise of my work. After all, if two people are talking to me about a story I've written and one says "Oh my gosh, it's the best thing ever!!!" and the other says "Meh. Well, I liked this and this but that and that need some work." then it's a heck of a lot easier to only listen to the first person. But there are plenty of times when that will lead to slightly lazy, slightly sloppy work going out on submission, which isn't where you want to be going if you're trying to succeed at the top-level markets.
But then again -- here's where it gets really tricky -- sometimes listening to the first person is the right thing to do. Maybe the story as written would be "better" than the story as revised to meet the second person's preferences. After all, every single story that's ever been written will have a certain percentage of readers who simply don't like it. I've seen stories nominated for major awards get absolutely shredded by readers. Not because they're contrary or "didn't get it" or anything like that. It just won't have hit their fiction-loving buttons.
So judgement is required. You have to know when to trust your gut and which opinions to trust when you're getting feedback on your work. And this ties back to the original statement, too. If someone is always positive about your work, if they just love every word you've ever written... Then they're not helpful as someone to provide feedback on your work because you already know what they're going to say.
Are there other ways than these that you've found praise for your writing to be damaging?
I've found that, especially in large writing groups, circles of what I'd call mutual backslappers tend to develop where not only a writer can find guaranteed praise, but can be assured of things like "You'll surely sell this". This is comforting to the ego at the time, but more often than not, the person who says it has no market experience. It can lead to the writer having an irrational attachment to the story (but so-and-so said it was good...) and spending way too much emotional energy on it (because so-and-so said it was good). Especially at an early stage of a writers' career (which is when you are most likely to take part in critique groups) the chance of getting published is far better if you write another story rather than edit and tweak the same story over and over, because you've got yourself in a state about its quality.
ReplyDeleteIMO, it is far better to seek out someone who says the story sucks and the submit it in a fit of I'll-show-em anger.
I've sold a number of stories where that happened, often on first submission, while a story that eight critiquers loved and assured me that it would sell remains unsold after many submissions.
Patty,
DeleteThanks for stopping by and commenting! I can definitely see someone getting hung up on "but so-and-so said it was good." And even if that is true, it doesn't mean a guaranteed easy sale!
"Especially at an early stage of a writers' career [...] the chance of getting published is far better if you write another story rather than edit and tweak the same story over and over" -- Absolutely! Make the story the best that today's you can and move on to another story.
It's a tricky thing all right. 'Golden word syndrome' is an easy thing to catch, too (well, it's only 'golden word syndrome' for famous writers; it's 'neo-pro disease' for writers on their way to being well known, but anyway).
ReplyDeleteI do agree that having confidence in our work and not jumping to correct every thing (or occasionally, any thing) critters point out to us is necessary. Essential, really.
The difficulty is knowing when to listen to critique and when not to. I'm not sure there is a definitive answer for that.
But, personally, i'd much rather someone tearing my work apart than just telling me how much they love it. Even if i don't agree with their crit/advice, it still helps me look at a story with a critical eye.
Sam,
Delete"The difficulty is knowing when to listen to critique and when not to." No kidding! I try to go by the general rule of "when I read what the critiquer says and say to myself: 'Oh... Yeah. That's a good point.'" The trick *then* is making sure that I'm not talking myself out of good suggestions through a desire to move on to another story.
Thanks for stopping by and commenting!
For me, one of two things happens when I get too much breathless praise. I either drink my own Kool-Aid and get sloppy, or I start feeling like I can't possibly live up to the praise I've gotten, and panic.
ReplyDeleteI've got to agree with Daniel, especially about the Kool-Aid. I spent too many years following that rabbit-hole and it got me no where. Give me the viscious beta-readers; short-term pain for long-term gain.
DeleteI can relate a bit to both parts of what Daniel says. The latter part has felt especially strong recently. I've been struggling a bit the last month or so to do more than "noodling" writing. I've written a half-dozen or so fun little stories, but have only attempted a couple of serious things in that time. I think it's partly that I've gotten myself convinced that I need SUPREME FOCUS to work on the serious stuff. And that's rubbish. Now if I can just get myself to remember that that's rubbish, I'll be all set!
DeleteI kind of ignore generic praise. I say thanks and I smile, but actually I don't take any notice at all. I can tell when someone is genuinely moved by something I've written, and that means a lot to me, but that's about making a connection, not being told I'm a brilliant writer. I have my moments of brilliance, like everyone else, but if I went around thinking I had nothing to learn, that would be a disaster.
ReplyDeleteThanks for stopping by and commenting. Agreed that if we start thinking we've got nothing to learn (no matter WHERE in our development we are) we're probably lying to ourselves.
DeleteI certainly do think that praise can be damaging. New writers don't understand that when experienced writers praise them, they're being praised for their potential (you might someday be capable of doing something interesting) or for exceeding already-low expectations (this is better than I expected) or for the tiny glimmer of goodness in their work (this part is professional-quality, but the rest is nowhere near as good).
ReplyDeleteWriters can hear praise and think, "I'm almost there!" when all the praise really means is, "I can imagine that you might someday get to a place where you're writing something publishable." I think that these writers then get very disillusioned when they send out their work. They think they're a few steps from publication, when really they're several years away. New writers have no understanding of how much there is out there that's very bad and how much that's mediocre. They don't understand that it's a real accomplishment to rise, even briefly, from the bad into the mediocre, but how that still doesn't mean that they're necessarily very good.
That having been said, I think it depends on the person. For some people, too much praise saps their ambitions, while other people would wither away and give up if they didn't get any praise.
I've definitely been a victim of this. I was praised early on by some people I really respected, and I took their praise to mean: This is all great, right now. In reality, it meant: There's a glimmer in you, but you're going to need to work really hard to extract it. I spent a good six years not working hard until I realized my error. Now, I grind. One day, it'll pay off, but bad certainly comes before good and good certainly comes long before a shard of great.
DeleteGreat points, both of you.
DeleteAnd to blotter's comment "New writers have no understanding of how much there is out there that's very bad and how much that's mediocre. They don't understand that it's a real accomplishment to rise, even briefly, from the bad into the mediocre, but how that still doesn't mean that they're necessarily very good." I would add this...
New writers also don't understand just how much out there is very good and how few spots those very good pieces are competing for. Even very good stories can struggle to find homes.
What to do with critiques is such a difficult subject. I think it all comes down to what you say in your last paragraph. You have to learn to trust your gut. I think Hemingway said that what every writer most needs is a good s*** detector. Unfortunately, it takes a long time, a lot of writing AND reading to develop a trustworthy gut. And don't forget to pay attention to those golden nuggets of criticism you sometimes get from an editor who's rejecting a story.
ReplyDeleteHi Jeff, thanks for stopping by and commenting!
DeleteGood points, though I'd hesitate a bit too elevate comments from editors *too* much. They are, in the end, a single opinion. And while they're often a well-informed opinion, remember that not all editors think alike. A change you make to a story based on one editor's comments might be the change that sells the story. Conversely, it might also be the change that keeps the next editor from buying the story.
As you said, a very difficult subject!
I generally ignore all praise that's given to my work. There is a qualifier, which I'll explain below.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I'm not an ass when praised: I say "Thanks," or smile and nod in appreciation. But most of the time, praise like that comes from people I know--friends, family, even beta readers--and it's pretty well useless. Like I said, I say thanks or whatever, then take into consideration their constructive comments and do a whole-piece revision. I, personally, never really revise "sections" of an unpublished work.
My qualifier, as mentioned above, is that pertains (mostly) to pre-published work. Once a piece is accepted and in print/online, by all means, tell me how great it is. I've moved on to my next piece and can accept praise on a finished project.
Of course, even then, I take those compliments with an extreme grain of salt. When I really, really like something, I'm telling my friends and posting reviews, which in turn helps other readers find that author. I find it a much better way to say, "Your work is off the hook."
Awesome blog post!
Thanks for stopping by and commenting. I'll say that if a critiquer who normally is very good at pointing out flaws in a work looks at something and says "This is really good" then that means a lot to me. Now, if another similarly-good critiquer points out some other issues, I'll still think about their comments as well. But I do think it's possible to overanalyze your work.
DeleteAnd, yes, once something is published, people are free to give all the praise they want. I certainly don't mind polite criticism as well, since it could help with future pieces. But, as you said, that piece is done and I've moved on.
Thanks for your thoughts!