In response to my post on Jane Quill's novel, Nectar from a Stone, I received the following comment from Frank. It provides a window into how incredibly subjective all reading and editing is. I'm hugely aware of that, and everyone has a right to an opinion.
However, I was glad his comment did not automatically go up on the day that the author was also visiting what I'd posted on FtQ. You'll see why…I think. You can scroll down a couple of posts to see the complete text of the original.
In the excerpt of the novel posted, the scene was the protagonist being used as a sexual utility by her husband. The first lines of the novel are:
Maelgwyn's 'husbandly attention,' as he called it, went on and on. Strange, how time could creep and crawl.
Frank wrote:
Was interested in your response to the beginning of Nectar From a Stone. I'm currently editing my own latest, so am hypercritical, but I was surprised by your response.
First sentence, good. Second, not so much. 'Strange, how time could creep and crawl.' In fact, this isn't strange, it's a commonplace. Time flies when you're having fun ...
"The room grew darker as the fire died."
'Fire died' is a cliché.
"Lying there, all she'd heard was the sighing of the wind, outside, and the faint rush of blood in her ears."
Sighing of wind and faint rush of blood in her ears? Not sure I'd allow that in my own stuff, and my stuff sucks.
"He stared down into her face."
Into her face? You mean 'at her?'
"I have never studied to be wayward to you, sir," she said.
Yeah, that's pretty damn great. I wish I could write that well. (Being serious, if I sound snotty.)
He reached down to pinch her thigh, his usual way of emphasizing a point.
His usual way? How often do they fuck?
Bit back a cry? Again, reliance on cliché.
"As we speak, worthy Welshmen bleed on French battlefields. And in the course of the Great Mortality, thousands of good Christians fell. Yet you survived, Elise. And then you were so fortunate as to come here to me. Deo dilecti. But why?"
Ouch! Calling Dr. Exposition.
Now to go through Frank's comments and respond. I would love to hear what you think about all of this.
First sentence, good. Second, not so much. 'Strange, how time could creep and crawl.' In fact, this isn't strange, it's a commonplace. Time flies when you're having fun ...
I disagree. The point is how what's happening feels to the character, not to the reader. Her experience may not echo yours, and should not. As for "Time flies when you're having fun…," the woman is being used by an uncaring, unloving man. This is not having fun. In fact, time does crawl when you're not having fun.
"The room grew darker as the fire died."
'Fire died' is a cliché.
Nope, not a cliché. "Where there's smoke there's fire." is a cliché. The author used a common expression, yes, because everyone knows that fires do die. Using "darker" and "died" contribute to her dark mood, too. I felt, and still do, that this was a wonderfully efficient way to let us know about time passing while this guy was pumping away at her.
"Lying there, all she'd heard was the sighing of the wind, outside, and the faint rush of blood in her ears."
Sighing of wind and faint rush of blood in her ears? Not sure I'd allow that in my own stuff, and my stuff sucks.
Why wouldn't you "allow" it? If you're going to critique something and think there's a problem, I feel you're obligated to say why. And to offer direction for a solution. As for this sentence, it spoke to me of the silence in the room, and her inner isolation. "Sighing" and "faint rush" bespeak hardly audible sounds that increase our sense of her isolation.
"He stared down into her face."
Into her face? You mean 'at her?'
No, she meant "into." For me, this helps me picture the intensity and aggressiveness of this man. Staring "at" her in no way accomplishes this. The man is pushing his stare at her as if it were a weapon.
"I have never studied to be wayward to you, sir," she said.
Yeah, that's pretty damn great. I wish I could write that well. (Being serious, if I sound snotty.)
Yeah, you've been sounding pretty snotty. And I believe there's no call for that. In fact, there is a need for exactly the opposite.
He reached down to pinch her thigh, his usual way of emphasizing a point.
His usual way? How often do they fuck?
The author clearly means that he usually does this abusive thing on a frequent basis, and it is not limited to when they are having intercourse. He pinches to emphasize points when he talks, and he talks to her at other times, I'm sure. And in an equally nasty way.
Bit back a cry? Again, reliance on cliché.
Yeah, it is a bit of a cliché. You've got me on that one. In a real, paid edit
"As we speak, worthy Welshmen bleed on French battlefields. And in the course of the Great Mortality, thousands of good Christians fell. Yet you survived, Elise. And then you were so fortunate as to come here to me. Deo dilecti. But why?"
Ouch! Calling Dr. Exposition.
Now this is rude. And, to my subjective eye, off the mark. What this character says, and when he says it, and how he says it, go to characterization. That he chooses to browbeat her with a war and a plague while at the same time using her limp body for carnal satisfaction says loads to me about his character. Also, I prefer using dialogue to add exposition from a character's point if view rather than just laying it out there in the author's voice.
Let me be clear: Frank has every right to every opinion about every word in anything he reads. My problem is what happens when you post on a medium that reaches around the world. Overall, I felt that the tone of Frank's comments was condescending and, at times, unpleasant. Certainly not considerate. Here's why I was glad the comment wasn't posted when he wrote it: it so happened that the author visited Flogging the Quill after I emailed her about the post. She wrote to me:
"Since NECTAR was officially published last week, I've been so off-kilter, alternating between vertigo and terrified shame."
Obviously she's on emotional tenterhooks, and to have received snarky comments such as Frank's would have surely been upsetting. No writer deserves that. The work and talent that go into creating a novel and then managing to be published deserves respect. Criticizing a writer's work demands courtesy and consideration.
At least that's the way I see it. What do you folks out there have to say?
RR
Free edit in exchange for posting permission. You send a sample that you have questions about and of which you'd like an edit. I won't post it without your permission.
Tip Jar: visitors have asked for a way to lay a dime or two on me and, I'll confess, it would be helpful. So if you want to chip in, click here. And many thanks.
© 2005 Ray Rhamey
Hi,
I started reading your blog only a short time ago, but I've found the posts interesting. This is the first time I felt the need to respond to something and it is to support your position...mostly.
Frank had every right to make this assessment. Making these kinds of assessments of published works is one of the ways writers grow. It also reveals that a work doesn't have to be letter perfect to be published and enjoyed, something that gives me a measure of relief because no matter how much editing and/or critiquing, something always slips through.
It also speaks to the understanding that not every person will like every book. There have often enough been books that I love but my friends and family struggle to finish. What sounds like a random info dump to one person is a depth-filled character study to another. As writers, we cannot control how a reader responds to our work and should expect as much condemnation as praise. While I have been thrilled to hear positive comments about my writing, both non-fiction and fiction, in all honesty, I know not everyone will find them compelling or useful.
That said, I have to say that this kind of in-depth critique (though not the tone) is only appropriate when requested or as a paid critic. Doing the assessment is fine, but publishing a harsh, line-by-line critique on a public forum borders on the side of harassment. What is hoped to gain from this? What are those reading this blog to learn from the snarky tone? Whether I agree or disagree with the contents of the critique, the forum and tone only tells me that Frank is another disappointed, unpublished author who gets his thrills knocking down those who make into print. Whether or not this is true, that's what I gained from this.
Oh, one other thing there is to gain. This post reminds me of the public nature of online posts. You'd be surprised at the reputation you can gain with just a few, poorly thought through, words. And having gained such a reputation, even if you modify your behavior, it will take an age before people read your posts with an unbiased eye. The Web is definitely a think twice, write once environment because your words are immortal as soon as you press send.
/me goes and reviews this post even knowing she'll miss something :p.
Cheers,
Margaret
Posted by: Margaret Fisk | March 24, 2005 at 10:20 AM
Margaret,
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I hope I made clear enough at the top of the post that Frank has a right to his opinion. What bugged me most was his attitude...maybe along with such a narrow approach to the prose.
And it was the immediate, world-wide reach of the Internet that prompted me to put this post up. This is the first time I've said anything that could be considered "controversial," but I felt it could be an object lesson for others who are tempted to be "snarky" about what they say regarding another writer's work.
Best,
Ray
Posted by: Ray Rhamey | March 24, 2005 at 10:32 AM
Totally agree with Ray.
I think Frank was "looking at" her writing in a very superficial way, not absorbing it. There was superb insight within each sentence that he seemed to have missed entirely.
"He stared down into her face" did not likely mean, as Frank insinuates, that the husband simply looked AT her. What I got was that the husband is superior, somewhat threatening. His eyes are boring into her as intrusively as is his body.
And when husband reaches down "to pinch her thigh,..." I'm left despising him, (although I might have a particularly strong distaste for pinchers!) This says so much about the husband, driving his points by inflicting pain, especially as she lies underneath him, vulnerable. (Small, small man - did I mention hating him?)
What I really liked was that so much meaning came through in very few words, yet the writing remined delicate... but never flowery.
Instead of ripping apart this elegant work, Frank might try learning from it. It's the kind of work that leaves my mouth hanging open in awe.
I'll buy the book.
T.
Posted by: T | March 24, 2005 at 10:34 AM
I agree with you, Ray. Frank's comments struck me as coming from someone looking for things to take exception to. The excerpt is both poetic and straightforward and really sets the mood. To find fault with "stared down into her face" indicates to me that Frank isn't fully aware of or doesn't view the nuances of personal interaction as the author, and I, do. I can easily picture the kind of stare where the starer seems to be looking right through you. It can make you feel lower than low, an insignificant speck. To me, it's clear from that and the other statements, that the pov character is feeling belittled.
Maybe Frank just has a different opinion. Maybe, though, he missed the context. Is that the author's fault? Only if most readers miss it, I'd say. :)
Posted by: Shelly | March 24, 2005 at 04:26 PM
Ray, it's really quite simple: You're a good editor, and Frank might be, too, but it's impossible to tell, because his tone overwhelms anything good he might want to contribute.
Posted by: adam | March 25, 2005 at 12:17 PM
Well, I guess by sharing the first few paragraphs of the book with us on a forum about editing, you did kind of open it up to analysis. However, I found myself so completely in agreement with you after reading your original post that I went and bought myself a copy.
If Jane Quill does come back and read Frank's (less than masterful) critique, hopefully the knowledge that a random reader was persuaded to part with cash after reading just the first page of her novel will put a smile on her face.
Posted by: Gemma | March 28, 2005 at 07:23 AM