Why all the obsession about grammar in the "Critique and Advice" forum?

[Sam Winchester]

Seigfried, there's a difference between having a 'knack' and being a good writer. I have a knack for playing guitar, but that doesn't make me Jimi Hendrix. I, too, have recently gone back to some of my earlier work (written when I was eighteen) and grimaced. Not because of teen angst or anything like that, but because the writing was poor in comparison to my new work. I attribute this to two things: first, me being my own worst critic, and second, my friends and family giving me honest critiques intended to help rather than mollycuddle me.

As for life experiences, I've seen and done a lot of things; things you couldn't believe. That gives me a better imagination, it doesn't necessarily make me a better writer.

Sam.

[The Backward OX]

Originally Posted by seigfried007

Bourbon didn't say that teens couldn't write--she said that they often don't have the life experience to put texture into it. You know, to write believable older people and put those details that only we older people usually know (mortgages, bills, living on our own, moving cross country with the military, getting laid off, taxes, marriage, parenthood, sending your babies off to college, the deaths of people very close to them like spouses, friends or parents).

It stands to reason that younger people do not have the life experience to write those kinds of experiences without lots of research or a painful life filled with, well, living too much life in a short time. Even then, it won't be the POV of a young person, but an older person in a young body.

It also stand to reason that a teenager has not read as much as an older person. We can all hope that with more life lived, a person has found new experiences beyond the ken of teenagers.

It's also arrogant of a teenager to assume they can 'knack' his way through writing mature fiction. You know, older people can have a knack for writing too, and they've often been nurturing it a hell of a lot longer than you too

I'm speaking as a formerly arrogant teenager who's now blessedly removed my head from my anus via years of adulthood and many apologies to parents who loved me and were vastly unappreciated.

If you can't tell, I was one of those 'knack' writers too, Sam. I started out miles ahead of other teenagers--praised for my extreme effort, devotion to the craft and raw talent and creativity. But those things can't make up for life experience. I could write an immature adult and even pass myself off as capable of writing reasonably sane, intelligent adults, but my experience of many things mundane in an adult's life was lacking. I was not widely traveled though I aspired to be well-read in the calssics as well as more modern authors like King and Crichton.

Even other adults liked my teenaged works, but I've since deleted or lost all of them but one. I went back to it a year ago and groaned all the way through it. The characters... Sam, my protagonists were just as angsty and selfish as anything one could expect of a teenaged author.

Like Bourbon said, however, a teenaged writer willing to learn and accept criticism is definitely something worth investing in. He is a bright country willing and ready to be developed, honed and pruned to fruition and productivity. Fertile ground. Like with many trades, many come to the end of life having learned great things concerning their crafts and wish to impart these bits of wisdom and knowledge onto someone young and hopefully able to continue that legacy.

Telling Sam this is water off a duck's back. You could have saved your breath.

[Sam Winchester]

Originally Posted by The Backward OX

Telling Sam this is water off a duck's back. You could have saved your breath.

Care to explain why, Ox?

Sam.

[desm]

I'm seventeen. I said that in my introduction thread, and I say it now. Simply because I don't think it's important. Yes, I haven't the life experience of an older person, and I can't write realistic adult characters as well as they can.
But how realistic those characters are should be judged on those characters. Not my age. People of all ages write bad characters, sure it's mostly younger people, but it happens across the board. Realism is proportional to experience, not age. I'm here to be judged on the quality of my writing, and I'd like that judgement to be based on that writing.
As for grammar, a lot of posts made on this forum are riddled with atrocious grammar. And I'm convinced that not all my grammar related critiques have been made of (if that's grammatically correct) people younger than myself. Anyway I always think One of the most impotent things in fiction is flow and without grammar and quality proff reading nothing flows ever.

oh ~ I always want honest critiques. If my works shit I'd like to be the first to know...

[WriterDude]

Geez, this is stupid. And I don't care if you get offended, as I'm not hanging around here any longer. I agree with dawnstorm, as in if you want apples, don't settle for oranges. This is what I was talking about, yet no one seem to care. Even dawnstorm, surprisingly.

The point is I write at home, for myself, on my own computer. I have a spellchecker ready to catch the spelling errors, a dictionary (offline and online) if I ever get stuck on a certain word of phrase and always print the entire story and read through it with a pen ready to catch even more errors and edit a bit before I even consider handing it to a publisher. I have no interest what so ever to hear if spelt who when I should have spelt whom, or spelt surprise with two r's by mistake. All I want is to hear a few comments on the story itself. Is it good, and if so, why? If it's not, then again why? That's about it. If you like it, how can it be improved? If it's bad, can it be fixed?

But nope, it's grammar this, spelling errors that. I got more than enough of that at school, so I'm leaving. Guess this is a goodbye to the few decent people I've met here, and a "don't bother open the door for me" to everyone else. Which is quite a lot of you, sadly.

[Sam Winchester]

Good riddance. If you can't stand a little constructive criticism every now and then, I guess this really isn't the site for you. But, like many have said, had you bothered to state in your posts that you wanted advice on anything but grammar, maybe you might have been a little bit more fortunate.

I really think it's laughable that people can't take a little criticism without becoming immediately defensive. Anytime anyone gives me advice I don't like, I simply say 'thank you, point appreciated, and I'll take a look at that'. I may never take a look at it, but at least I've thanked them for their input and not acted like a self-righteous asshole. If you want advice on anything other than grammar, state that, otherwise how the hell are we supposed to know?

Sam.

[Randatos]

I second Sam. I agree with the concept of if you want apples, don't settle for oranges. If you want critiques, and when you get critiques you complain bout the critiques, that isn't the critiques fault. That you're up in arms about someone downing your grammar is almost laughable. We do care. You've made it clear that you're the one that doesn't. If people didn't care then they wouldn't be offering you their help, would they?

You want story critiques and not grammar. That's fine. Then talk about the story, not the writing. Posting a story you've written is asking for whatever comes to the readers mind. If they see a grammar problem they'll point it out. If they see a story problem they'll point it out. If you want something specific just say so.

You asked for critiques on your story and your grammar. If you don't like the way people do that, just smile and take it. If you leave, good. That's one less failed writer on the board. Maybe someday you'll open your eyes and realize how pathetic you are of a writer to be making these complaints. Good luck with that.

[strangedaze]

Okay, okay. Time to put the breaks on this. WD, hate to see you go. Hope you change your mind. The suggestion of putting a note in a piece specifying what you'd like your readers to pay attention to is a good one.

WD has taken a lot of flack, perhaps justly so in some cases. Still personal attacks have no place in discussions like this. Not to pick on you, Randatos, but calling him a pathetic writer isn't really kosher. I agree with everything you said up to that point. Just keep the discussion away from WD as an individual.

Thassall.

[The Backward OX]

Originally Posted by Sam Winchester

Care to explain why, Ox?

Sam.

You answered your own question: first phrase, third sentence, second paragraph, Post #66.

[The Backward OX]

Post #66

Originally Posted by Sam Winchester

Good riddance. If you can't stand a little constructive criticism every now and then, I guess this really isn't the site for you. But, like many have said, had you bothered to state in your posts that you wanted advice on anything but grammar, maybe you might have been a little bit more fortunate.

I really think it's laughable that people can't take a little criticism without becoming immediately defensive. Anytime anyone gives me advice I don't like, I simply say 'thank you, point appreciated, and I'll take a look at that'. I may never take a look at it, but at least I've thanked them for their input and not acted like a self-righteous asshole. If you want advice on anything other than grammar, state that, otherwise how the hell are we supposed to know?

Sam.

[Sam Winchester]

Jesus you are confusing at times, Ox. What, exactly, are you mumbling on about this time? Something about criticism? Say what you want to say and quit candy-assing your way around it!

Sam.

[The Backward OX]

Originally Posted by Sam Winchester

Seigfried, there's a difference between having a 'knack' and being a good writer. I have a knack for playing guitar, but that doesn't make me Jimi Hendrix. I, too, have recently gone back to some of my earlier work (written when I was eighteen) and grimaced. Not because of teen angst or anything like that, but because the writing was poor in comparison to my new work. I attribute this to two things: first, me being my own worst critic, and second, my friends and family giving me honest critiques intended to help rather than mollycuddle me.

As for life experiences, I've seen and done a lot of things; things you couldn't believe. That gives me a better imagination, it doesn't necessarily make me a better writer.

Sam.

Is there anything you can’t turn your hand to? How about sticking a broom up your arse to sweep up all the bullshit? Can you do that?

[Foxee]

It's time for the personal comments to end and the discussion to veer back on course, please.

[seigfried007]

Originally Posted by Sam Winchester

Seigfried, there's a difference between having a 'knack' and being a good writer. I have a knack for playing guitar, but that doesn't make me Jimi Hendrix. I, too, have recently gone back to some of my earlier work (written when I was eighteen) and grimaced. Not because of teen angst or anything like that, but because the writing was poor in comparison to my new work. I attribute this to two things: first, me being my own worst critic, and second, my friends and family giving me honest critiques intended to help rather than mollycuddle me.

As for life experiences, I've seen and done a lot of things; things you couldn't believe. That gives me a better imagination, it doesn't necessarily make me a better writer.

Sam.

Since when did I say experience makes someone a better writer--like that must be the only thing that's required? Obviously there's more to writing than experience or all geezers would be fabulous novelists.

You'd be hella surprised what I can imagine, Sam. Never insult me like that again, please.

I've never said anything but honest was good--only that diplomacy was often called for and other basic bits of courtesy. You don't disagree with that because you've said yourself that you try to write critics as though they're for you (golden rule applied to critiquing). Honest critiques are necessary. Just as necessary as developing thick skin and not taking remarks made on a piece you've poured your soul into personally.

I've never claimed you were a teenager either. Never that you had a lack of life experience.

See, my teenaged writings were above par as far as mechanics and craft were concerned. My problem was the evident lack of research in minor details of adulthood and the protagonist, who was 15 in the piece, but who I had thought of as more or less mature and adult reasoning, was in fact described very much his age without my meaning to. Painfully lacking in wisdom. Perfectly realistic for the piece again, just painful to read. I had outgrown him and instead of thinking he was cool, I just wanted to slap him.

To desm, all characters and writings should be judged impartial to race, age, gender, etc. If they work, they work. Great. Good for you. Never said otherwise. I only said that it's difficult to write from experience you don't have. That's where research comes into play.

[The Backward OX]

Originally Posted by Foxee

It's time for the personal comments to end and the discussion to veer back on course, please.