Published At Last!!!!

[kangels4ever]

Hi all,

While I've stopped sharing my stories here, I did want to drop back in with great news: it took an unconventional approach, but now -thanks to Lulu.com- the short story I posted and shared the most here -"Arizona I remember you" is now published in both a print and an e-version.

{edit}

I would strongly reccomend this place to struggling first-time fiction authors; IMO the market is shrinking rather than growing in the magazine & e-zine market and -while it is not permission to be sloppy in your work - self-publishing at the likes of Lulu.com is a terrific way of "pushing through the wall" (to paraphrase Captain Haddock from "Titnin") and getting your voice heard at last.

[tomingram]

If you just want to get your creative work read by other people, why not just post it on a blog? Or here?

[Varenne Rodin]

If you just want to get your creative work read by other people, why not just post it on a blog? Or here?

If I remember correctly, he stopped posting his stories here because some people were critical of his female characters being portrayed as weak, soulless objects in need of stalking by men hung up on sexual issues with their parents. It was remarked that single men with similar fantasies of easy, abused women who enjoy talk about rancid bodily fluids would possibly enjoy his diary entry style of writing. It was also noted that they had been wrongly categorized in the "Romance" or "Chick-lit" genres.

Best of luck finding the audience necessary for success with this material.

[tomingram]

Hence the need for self publication, I suppose. No surprise there, eh?

Not sure why anyone would be so excited about being self-published. I mean, that only means that you couldn't get any one else to believe in your book enough to financially back it, so you had to dip into your own pocket.

I hope the gentlemen realizes that most of those self published books don't make any money.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Good for you, kangels. Don't listen to others. I looked over some of your stuff and I couldn't find what Varenne describes. Tom sounds like one of those people who have to badmouth anything someone is really excited about; you know the type--people who when you get a new car have to point out all its flaws. I don't know why they do it; maybe it's jealousy, maybe spite, or maybe they're just miserable and want to bring everyone down to their level.

I think it's great you got published, even if it is self-published. I hope you find success.

[tomingram]

Gosh, you know an awful lot about me. Tell me more about how terrible I am.

More books are being published today than ever before. If you have to go through self-publication, chances are you're better off spending that time practicing at your craft, improving your writing, so that a publishing house will back your book. Unless it's your family recipes, a cookbook to pass on to your kids. I suppose that's a little different.

I'm genuinely interested in the question I initially asked. I'd like to know why people pursue self-publication for their work.

But, well, gosh fella, if that makes me a spiteful, low-down jerk, maybe I ought not be so curious. I'd especially hate to inspire anonymous people on an internet forum to accuse me of possessing such nasty qualities. You know, get rung down to the level of making bizarre assumptions about people I have never met.

[Charles Darnay]

Gosh, you know an awful lot about me. Tell me more about how terrible I am.

More books are being published today than ever before. If you have to go through self-publication, chances are you're better off spending that time practicing at your craft, improving your writing, so that a publishing house will back your book. Unless it's your family recipes, a cookbook to pass on to your kids. I suppose that's a little different.

I'm genuinely interested in the question I initially asked. I'd like to know why people pursue self-publication for their work.

But, well, gosh fella, if that makes me a spiteful, low-down jerk, maybe I ought not be so curious. I'd especially hate to inspire anonymous people on an internet forum to accuse me of possessing such nasty qualities. You know, get rung down to the level of making bizarre assumptions about people I have never met.


Publishers look for authors who can take an active role in marketing. Self publishing allows you to explore this so you can go to a publisher and say, look, here's my book and here is all the positive response I was able to drum up via social media, now print my book you sod. But don't call your publisher a sod, they don't like that.

[tomingram]

Publishers look for authors who can take an active role in marketing. Self publishing allows you to explore this so you can go to a publisher and say, look, here's my book and here is all the positive response I was able to drum up via social media, now print my book you sod. But don't call your publisher a sod, they don't like that.

First, thank you.

I can see this. Because more books are published now than ever before, I suppose being a successful self-marketer demonstrates to publishers that you have the ability to separate your work from the crowd.

Still, I'm a little skeptical -- especially considering the number of self-published books out there.

Is there an advantage to self-publishing a book over, say, publishing stories or novel excerpts in journals and literary magazines?

Seems like with the hundreds and hundreds of publishing venues available, that it would be better to promote your work via a medium that requires others to first recognize the literary merit of your work.

[Charles Darnay]

The problem is there is no longer hundreds of literary journals. They are shutting down so quickly whereas kindle grows. New writers are emerging online, not in print. As much as I dislike if, for I'm a purist, this is the case

[Varenne Rodin]

I think self publishing is great. Good for the people who do it. There is a nice market for it through amazon. My criticisms of this particular writer's work were valid, coming from a woman who was disgusted by the creepiness of his musings. If someone disagrees, cool. I'm sure there are people who are into stories about beating up boyfriends and talking to girls about the way their mom has to "stink" during sex. Usually though, that kind of writing would be presented as horror or crime drama. Calling it innocent, pure romance? It isn't.

[Adolescent09]

I think self publishing is great. Good for the people who do it. There is a nice market for it through amazon. My criticisms of this particular writer's work were valid, coming from a woman who was disgusted by the creepiness of his musings. If someone disagrees, cool. I'm sure there are people who are into stories about beating up boyfriends and talking to girls about the way their mom has to "stink" during sex. Usually though, that kind of writing would be presented as horror or crime drama. Calling it innocent, pure romance? It isn't.

*Cough* *Cough* The Godfather Trilogy *Cough* *Cough* Women and men are treated like pinatas *Cough* *Cough* Highly successful trilogy leading to controversially the two greatest movies in all of cinema *Cough*.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Gosh, you know an awful lot about me. Tell me more about how terrible I am.

More books are being published today than ever before. If you have to go through self-publication, chances are you're better off spending that time practicing at your craft, improving your writing, so that a publishing house will back your book. Unless it's your family recipes, a cookbook to pass on to your kids. I suppose that's a little different.

I'm genuinely interested in the question I initially asked. I'd like to know why people pursue self-publication for their work.

But, well, gosh fella, if that makes me a spiteful, low-down jerk, maybe I ought not be so curious. I'd especially hate to inspire anonymous people on an internet forum to accuse me of possessing such nasty qualities. You know, get rung down to the level of making bizarre assumptions about people I have never met.
Well, fella, if I misjudged you then I apologize, but I can only judge you by what you post, no? And what you posted seems to fit what I described. Look at what you said. You alluded to him he was probably a bad writer by saying he couldn't get his book published, told him he wouldn't make any money, and had an all-around smart-*** attitude about it. I don't see why you couldn't have been more tactful. Plus, in your second post, you didn't ask the question you're referring to. So, forgive me, fella, for reading so much into that post so unjustly.

P.S. If you would like, I can five you a link to my FB page. I wouldn't want to look like a coward on an Internet forum, now would I?

[kangels4ever]

FYI: the short story I published is a war story. The other stuff I wrote and posted here has eithier been scrapped entirely or is undergoing massive revision.

Due to an excess of negativity directed at me in this thread, though, I will not be back for good. I have better things to do than argue with nameless, faceless fellow writers over the Internet. (Thank you Mutatis for your kind defense of me, though. :-) )

I do have one final opinion before parting: now I know why some writers never see their dreams fulfilled. All they want to do is lie in the mud and try to drag into it fellow writers who dare to pursue their dreams.

[Varenne Rodin]

*Cough* *Cough* The Godfather Trilogy *Cough* *Cough* Women and men are treated like pinatas *Cough* *Cough* Highly successful trilogy leading to controversially the two greatest movies in all of cinema *Cough*.

Totally misinterpreting what I'm saying. I like horror. I like the Godfather etc. This guy was trying to sell that love revolving around sex abuse is the most innocent and precious kind of love. He also had a warped sense of women. He gave zero depth to his female characters. There was no development, and no explanation as to what the motivation was for any girl to fall in love with his "heroes." The characters behaved like creeps, then suddenly "young" girls were in love with them for no reason. Flawed writing. Flawed psyche. I'm not bullying him. He thinks the way to romance women is to tell them sick stories about parental sex. Again, if you agree, good for you. :D

[tomingram]

Well, fella, if I misjudged you then I apologize, but I can only judge you by what you post, no?

Then the judgment would be that I reserve a skepticism toward self-publication and the motives behind self-publication. Which I do.


You alluded to him he was probably a bad writer by saying he couldn't get his book published, told him he wouldn't make any money, and had an all-around smart-*** attitude about it.

The smart *** aspect I won't deny.

If the interpretation of the works to which I responded is accurate, then there would be a solid reason why the author cannot get his books published without self-publishing them. Never said that anyone was a bad writer. Nor did I say that he wouldn't make any money, only that most self-published books don't. I don't recall venturing to predict the future sales pattern of a work I've never read, from an author I've never read.

As for the time-invested issue, I think it's perfectly valid. The process is time consuming. So is practicing at any craft. If a person's interest is to develop as a writer, should he spend his time self-publishing a book or spend his time practicing in order to increase his ability to be published by a reputable journal? That's a reasonable question. One that the thread starter could very well respond to. I'm genuinely interested in his response.

Perhaps in his reply, in giving an answer, this would have been cleared up. There are other things to consider as well.

Many wonderfully talented writers have trouble getting their books published. How is it that now canonized authors spent years despairing over the regular rejection of now classic works?

As for money, there's a video that you can find on youtube, an interview with David Foster Wallace, in which he discusses the tiny American market for intelligent literature. Perhaps publication and brisk sales tend to be indicative of poor literature rather than quality literature!

But that's my point: when you respond with gut toward a post and set out on the offensive, it's easy to overstate another person's opinion.

I'm not trying to offend anyone by bringing up my concerns with self-publication, and if I have, then I am sorry. Do what you will with you work, including self-publication. But I see no trouble with me having reservations about the process.


I don't see why you couldn't have been more tactful.

And that may be fair, but there's no doubt that you have committed precisely the same sin.


Plus, in your second post, you didn't ask the question you're referring to.

No, not verbatim. But the topic is certainly the same, playing on the same field. Why the expense of self-publication instead of pursuing free venues if the goal is to disseminate one's work? Isn't there a reason to be skeptical of the self-publication venue? Oughtn't we ask ourselves critical questions about self-publication?

The modern, internet based self-publication phenomenon raises important questions about contemporary literature. I don't mind getting into those questions.


P.S. If you would like, I can five you a link to my FB page. I wouldn't want to look like a coward on an Internet forum, now would I?

It isn't a matter of cowardice. Of course, I'm not sure how linking to a person's Facebook page could absolve them of cowardice even if cowardice were an issue. What would someone do with the link that could possibly be productive?

No, I'm fine without your Facebook page. What astonished me was that, instead of adding your reasonable and supportive comments, you decided to level ad hominem warning shots at me -- you could have easily engaged my concerns about self-publication in the way that Charles Darnay did.

Ultimately, my issue is that instead of pursuing a dialogue with me you tried to cut me down. I'm not worried about it, and certainly don't hold it against you. There's something admirable in your defense of the thread starter's self-publication, and I respect that. My primary interest is that we can continue frequenting these boards together and promote productive conversation, instead of reactionary, counter-productive discourse.

Shake, and call it a day?

[Haunted]

I'm genuinely interested in the question I initially asked. I'd like to know why people pursue self-publication for their work.

No you certainly are NOT interested in knowing. You aimed to deflate the OP, because you said this:


Not sure why anyone would be so excited about being self-published. I mean, that only means that you couldn't get any one else to believe in your book [...]
I hope the gentlemen realizes that most of those self published books don't make any money.


Such poor sportsmanship, sigh.

News Flash: Authors make very little money, period. Publishing houses pay a small advance, then after the work's published, authors just get royalties, which are crumbs. Unless everybody writes a blockbuster hit like Harry Potter, Da Vinci Code, Twilight or Hunger Games with a movie deal, don't quit your day job.



If you have to go through self-publication, chances are you're better off spending that time practicing at your craft, improving your writing, so that a publishing house will back your book.


Publishing houses are old school. Let's flip this and see what we have here:

If you have to go through a publishing house by writing 500 literary agents and spending the next 5 years following up with them, chances are you're better off putting that time to good use by self-publishing so you will be still able to practice at your craft and improving your writing.


Congrats kangels4ever, glad you are happy.

[Revolte]

Congrats!

And others, stop fighting.

If you don't believe in YOURSELF enough to publish your own work, that's when you have a problem.

Ya know poe's first book was self published, right? :cheers2:

[Bewlay Brother]

Varenne Rodin was mean first, and on her own. That's fine. Then suddenly, after being indifferent at first, Tom jumps in and screams down the OP's throat. Based on this first impression, Tom is one of those weak personality types.

I'm not basing my opinion off of that, of course, but Tom - you were way over-the-top and ruthless towards him. You were not just being "skeptical" about self-publishing. You were an ***. It's fine, just don't deny it because that is most definitely the way you came across in your second post on this thread.

[Bewlay Brother]

*Cough* *Cough* The Godfather Trilogy *Cough* *Cough* Women and men are treated like pinatas *Cough* *Cough* Highly successful trilogy leading to controversially the two greatest movies in all of cinema *Cough*.

Three words.

Young Al Pacino.

[Darcy88]

It was a little mean Tom. Even if its true its not right to say it. A woman asks you if she looks good you say yes even if she has frightful medusa hair and so much mascara on she looks ready to go umpire the 5th game of the world series.

Don't worry about it, just put yourself in the other person's shoes next time. Its only an internet forum but when it comes to creativity people are often sensitive and easily bruised.

[Varenne Rodin]

I wasn't trying to be mean. It was supposed to be an analysis of the intent of the OP. No one insulted this guy initially, back when he was posting here. He asked for honest opinions, he got them. He even tried to take the criticism constructively and rework some things. All was going fine. At some point he became offended by the opinions that some of his characters seemed pervy, and while that's perfectly fine in writing, he might want to change his classification of genre from "romance" to "drama", "suspense", or "horror". He then accused us all of attempting to corrupt something beautiful, innocent and pure. Something that involved abnormal, abusive sex acts and abusive relationships. He basically said that we were the abnormal ones for reacting to the not extremely common obsession with parental sex and control issues.

All of that led to him hurling insults at helpful, sweet people (I'm not talking about me) and storming off of Litnet, vowing never to return. So, I saw the thread title, "Published At Last!!!!" and thought to myself, wow! He did it! Someone appreciated his work! When I opened up the thread and saw that he self published, his big "gotcha" moment went up in smoke. I mean, it's clear he posted it that way to try to gain some sort of vindication for himself, when no one had wronged him in the first place.

My reaction was not some commentary on self-publication being pathetic or anything even sort of like that. The question was posed as to why he had left Litnet. He left Litnet in a huff and gave no apologies to the people he disrespected and offended. I'm mean? I feel bad for the guy. I really do hope he finds success. I also hope something will someday change the way he views women.

Tom gave honest opinions. He's not a villain. When he realized he had offended proponents of self publication, he made the effort to remove personalization from the conversation. If people want to talk about the virtues of self publishing, that's wonderful. Some people aren't into it. I think it's an exaggeration to decide those people are jerks.

[Varenne Rodin]

...and yes, I am being a bit mean. I feel like some incidents caused great writers and teachers to remove themselves from giving critiques. These incidents happened because help was requested and then scorned by people who didn't really want to know, or emotionally weren't ready to know, if they could improve their work.

[Calidore]

It was a little mean Tom. Even if its true its not right to say it. A woman asks you if she looks good you say yes even if she has frightful medusa hair and so much mascara on she looks ready to go umpire the 5th game of the world series.

If she needs to hear that she looks good regardless and the truth would serve no purpose except hurt feelings, then tell her she looks good. If she's your friend and about to embarrass herself, you do tell her the truth. You don't always help people when you tell them what they want to hear.

Frankly, if anyone can self-publish anything (and according to my dad, who does freelance proofreading for a vanity publisher, anyone can self-publish anything), I'm not sure how it counts as an achievement. If it's a psychological lift to keep you going, then wonderful. But without a professional's input, how do you improve? And if, like the girl in Darcy's example, hearing validation is more important than making the truth better, do you even have the drive to improve?

[Bewlay Brother]

I wasn't trying to be mean. It was supposed to be an analysis of the intent of the OP. No one insulted this guy initially, back when he was posting here. He asked for honest opinions, he got them. He even tried to take the criticism constructively and rework some things. All was going fine. At some point he became offended by the opinions that some of his characters seemed pervy, and while that's perfectly fine in writing, he might want to change his classification of genre from "romance" to "drama", "suspense", or "horror". He then accused us all of attempting to corrupt something beautiful, innocent and pure. Something that involved abnormal, abusive sex acts and abusive relationships. He basically said that we were the abnormal ones for reacting to the not extremely common obsession with parental sex and control issues.

All of that led to him hurling insults at helpful, sweet people (I'm not talking about me) and storming off of Litnet, vowing never to return. So, I saw the thread title, "Published At Last!!!!" and thought to myself, wow! He did it! Someone appreciated his work! When I opened up the thread and saw that he self published, his big "gotcha" moment went up in smoke. I mean, it's clear he posted it that way to try to gain some sort of vindication for himself, when no one had wronged him in the first place.

My reaction was not some commentary on self-publication being pathetic or anything even sort of like that. The question was posed as to why he had left Litnet. He left Litnet in a huff and gave no apologies to the people he disrespected and offended. I'm mean? I feel bad for the guy. I really do hope he finds success. I also hope something will someday change the way he views women.

Tom gave honest opinions. He's not a villain. When he realized he had offended proponents of self publication, he made the effort to remove personalization from the conversation. If people want to talk about the virtues of self publishing, that's wonderful. Some people aren't into it. I think it's an exaggeration to decide those people are jerks.

Yeah I can see that now. When I first read your comments, I had no idea who you were, the OP was, or who Tom was.

And I don't think Tom is a villain. I just think his second post on this thread was mean. I do acknowledge he tried to lighten it up. Also, I was thinking the OP was just a random poster. If anyone has a controversial history with him then it is never really, wrong to lash out at him lol.

[Darcy88]

I never meant you were being mean Varenne. You had thoughtful criticisms of the poster's work. I don't think Tom was being too nasty either, I just don't see the point in bringing someone down.

I hope you stick around on these forums Tom. I've been enjoying your contributions since you came aboard.

[tylerdf]

Not sure what I've walked in on here, but I would like to congratulate anyone who has the balls to self-publish these days. Its tough out there, and requires a real pride in your work. I recently self published my first novella, Soft Rot, on Amazon.

Congrats to Tom and to everyone else. Don't censor your art!

[Varenne Rodin]

I never meant you were being mean Varenne. You had thoughtful criticisms of the poster's work. I don't think Tom was being too nasty either, I just don't see the point in bringing someone down.

I hope you stick around on these forums Tom. I've been enjoying your contributions since you came aboard.

No worries, Darcy. I know. You're a sweetheart. My post wasn't meant ro be a response to yours, though now I see how it might have looked that way. Really, I should strive to be as compassionate as you are. :)

[Svidrigailov]

If you really think your material deserves to be seen by others, then I don't think it matters how you get it out there; self-publishing can be a good platform, I'd imagine, even though I don't know how many have found it a recipe for success. I know a few people who should just have bit the bullet by now, and paid for their novels to be available to an as-yet-undiscovered fanbase.

I take issue with the pricing structure on Lulu though, because it's pretty inflexible if $5 is a standard sum for an 18-page story. Recently, I picked up a spotless copy of The Story of Forgetting for the equivalent of $5, which amounted to 1.67 cents per page. Meanwhile, the OP's story comes in at about 28 cents per page, which is a bit steep for novice fiction, and can't possibly help their prospects of exposure.

[kangels4ever]

Varenne:

To be completely honest, you were always hypercritical re: my old romance attempts. I also felt your recommendations that I turn my boy meets girl, boy protects girl story into a "horror" to be madness. Was that the best you could do instead of offering helpful suggestions as to how to make the female character more believable?

[Jack of Hearts]

Well, you bumped it...

Jack of Hearts remembers you without even checking the archive. Your offerings, to discerning readers, had some particularly bad aspects. It would be interesting to see what changes you've made in your work over the years. But why bump this thread? Varenne couldn't help you. Your problem with your female characters (and the male interaction in them) was pre-technical; it was perceptual. It was fundamental.





J

[kangels4ever]

Well, you bumped it...

Jack of Hearts remembers you without even checking the archive. Your offerings, to discerning readers, had some particularly bad aspects. It would be interesting to see what changes you've made in your work over the years. But why bump this thread? Varenne couldn't help you. Your problem with your female characters (and the male interaction in them) was pre-technical; it was perceptual. It was fundamental.


I bumped the thread because I felt my treatment here was borderline internet bullying. Whenever I provide feedback to an author, I always do it in a sensitive, respectful manner. Here a lot of people just dumped on me.
I have nevertheless been devoting a lot of time and study to creating believable characters, be they female or male.

[Jack of Hearts]

Pfft.

kangels, the only thing special about your situation here is its particular flavor of cringe. Your works found a unique note there.

What really happens is that we make something, and we see how reality receives it. And lots of times, reality doesn't receive our creation in the way we want it to. But we can't control that. So we get 'butthurt.'

This isn't just 'you.' This is everybody. We all get our pretty princess emotions tangled up, and having to learn to deal with our new special feelings. Some of us mope and close the computer for a while (guilty). Some of us start thinking the readers are just stupid and can't recognize our inherent genius. And still, some of us come back and say, "Well, I was internet bullied!" as a means of working with those emotions (this is you). Then we all go back to sensitivity training so when you announce you're leaving forever (wb btw), we can write things like:


Hopefully it isn't because of the feedback you've gotten. Nobody wants to see you go, personally- and admittedly some of the feedback has been of the 'harsh and honest' variety. On the other hand, your stories get a lot of readership/feedback. You've already had greater success than this reader on that forum (most of Jack of Hearts' threads only have one response from hillwalker).

Even if it seemed harsh, that just means people believe you have the inherent skill to do better. That's way way better than readers behaving complacently toward you. Or the worst fate of all: astounding silence.

It's human instinct to burp the baby.

None of which changes the fact that you need to write better, it's the bottom line for you and (as mentioned above) since nobody is special it's the bottom line for all of us-- so get to it.






J

[Calidore]

Kangels, you got a great deal of sensitive, respectful feedback from hillwalker, Varenne, and others. Hillwalker, especially, gave you tons of encouragement in addition to his feedback. Varenne gave you a very valuable woman's perspective on your female characters (which was echoed by the male respondents as well). This commentary was consistent from multiple people across multiple stories; but at every turn, you put the responsibility for the problems your readers had with your stories and characters on those readers rather than on the writer where it belongs.

Now, after more than three years away, do you tell us--or better yet, post something to show us--how you've grown as a writer? No, it's just to tell everyone how all of the time and effort people spent trying to help you back in 2011 and 2012 was actually "borderline internet bullying." Come on, man. You spent a lot of time and effort yourself on writing and revising your posted stories, so I assume you really do (did?) want to be a writer. You must have done something since your last posting here besides nurse a 40-month sulk. I hope.

Your stories were deleted by you long ago, but the feedback remains. There's lots of valuable stuff in there that you can still use to help yourself (and anyone curious about this referenced "bullying" can see what was actually said to you).

Like Jack said, everybody goes through this. No writers, even those with decades-long careers, are editor-proof. The main thing is, the ones who can't grow a pair and accept help don't have decades-long careers; they don't have careers at all.

So what's more important to you, improvement or self-validation?

[kangels4ever]

Jack of hearts:

I let writers who are more professional review my work for me now. In fact, I got a peer-vetted short story published in an anthology last year.
I came to this forum expecting professionalism and respect, but the feedback I got from members like you ultimately took a negative, hypercritical turn.

[kangels4ever]

So what's more important to you, improvement or self-validation?

Improvement is important to me. As I noted above, I had a peer-reviewed short story published in an anthology last year. I listened to what my peers had to say because they were respectful and did not offer ridiculous suggestions.
Self-validation has nothing to do with my "bump" for this old thread, but standing up for myself is. I came to this forum asking for help and felt like I was getting it for awhile, including during the first phases of my romance story shares--but then everyone started to act...unprofessional.

[kangels4ever]

Another thing: I was a slush reader for Every Day Fiction from the summer of 2013 to the spring of 2015. It was an invaluable learning experience, including how good short stories are written.

[Jack of Hearts]

Well, we disagree.

Digging through your 'romance story shares' was done in good faith. It was not easy. And even still, trying to put a positive spin on something that yours truly felt shouldn't exist in the first place-- that, kangels, was the real act of creative writing. That should've been in Pushcart.

Also, a side note: we are not 'professional.' You are not paying for services rendered, although in this case it was probably merited. You kind of went 180 degrees with it, in saying that you needed to come back and stand up for yourself. It's really surprising. Here Jack of Hearts had been anticipating a hand written thank you letter and a check in the mail. But so much of literature is learning to appreciate multiple perspectives, or something.

Nobody cares what slush pile you've been in or where your stories have been published. Whether it was in a forum or in print Jack of Hearts wouldn't read it-- your work just wasn't good, and was only being read for 'good faith' anyway. But you've ruined what you had going there, we are out of 'good faith.'

It's a good thing your efforts have found all this success to comfort you, though. It would take five minutes to dig through the archive and find 10 posters exactly like you. This next part isn't actually intended to be cruel, though it will seem cruel-- it's intended to be helpful: You are a repeat, and your blown up noble cause of 'standing up for yourself' is really just ego playing itself out in the same way as all the others.






J

[kangels4ever]

Well, we disagree.

Digging through your 'romance story shares' was done in good faith. It was not easy. And even still, trying to put a positive spin on something that yours truly felt shouldn't exist in the first place-- that, kangels, was the real act of creative writing. That should've been in Pushcart.

Also, a side note: we are not 'professional.' You are not paying for services rendered, although in this case it was probably merited. You kind of went 180 degrees with it, in saying that you needed to come back and stand up for yourself. It's really surprising. Here Jack of Hearts had been anticipating a hand written thank you letter and a check in the mail. But so much of literature is learning to appreciate multiple perspectives, or something.

Nobody cares what slush pile you've been in or where your stories have been published. Whether it was in a forum or in print Jack of Hearts wouldn't read it-- your work just wasn't good, and was only being read for 'good faith' anyway. But you've ruined what you had going there, we are out of 'good faith.'

It's a good thing your efforts have found all this success to comfort you, though. It would take five minutes to dig through the archive and find 10 posters exactly like you. This next part isn't actually intended to be cruel, though it will seem cruel-- it's intended to be helpful: You are a repeat, and your blown up noble cause of 'standing up for yourself' is really just ego playing itself out in the same way as all the others.






J

Jack of Hearts:

Look at what you wrote. You are sounding like a classic internet bully now, not a writer.

[tailor STATELY]

Re: Published: Congratulations on your accomplishment.

Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY

[kangels4ever]

Re: Published: Congratulations on your accomplishment.

Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY

Thank you. :-)

[Calidore]

Improvement is important to me. As I noted above, I had a peer-reviewed short story published in an anthology last year. I listened to what my peers had to say because they were respectful and did not offer ridiculous suggestions.
Self-validation has nothing to do with my "bump" for this old thread, but standing up for myself is. I came to this forum asking for help and felt like I was getting it for awhile, including during the first phases of my romance story shares--but then everyone started to act...unprofessional.

I'll second Tailor on the congrats. Being published by someone else is much more of an accomplishment than publishing oneself. What was the anthology that published you? Were you paid (another step up)?

I'll also congratulate you for reading slush for a couple of years for Every Day Fiction. That kind of work is indeed a good education for a writer, and doing it for two years shows that you're serious. Plus, EDF is a credible site.

Regarding feedback, your posts have been unfortunately lacking in specifics, just more complaints, which comes off as nothing more than three-year-aged sour grapes. Just as feedback is important for a writer, feedback on feedback can be important as well. Instead of repeatedly tossing out subjective (and IMO completely inaccurate) words like hypercritical, bully, and unprofessional (okay, this one's technically accurate, but I disagree with your pejorative use of it), how about offering something useful? For example: How are the peers who reviewed the work that was eventually published different from the peers here? What about their feedback was "respectful" in a way that you felt was lacking in hillwalker et al.'s feedback? What changes did they suggest that you feel helped you?

The major point in this forum's issues with your work was your characters' dialogue and behavior being at odds with the way they were presented, i.e. male romantic "heroes" who behaved like aggressive creeps, and empty "heroines" who behaved like the fantasies of said men. Again, this wasn't from one person or about one story, but many people and many stories. Consensus makes it a writing issue, not a reading one. Furthermore, I don't remember anyone putting this on your own personality; it seemed more a failure of observation of details on your part leading to a failure of characterization. You even admitted yourself a weakness in writing women...but in the end you still put the blame on the readers. So have you accepted and addressed these issues, either by improving those skills or avoiding writing scenes that would spotlight the problem? (Both are perfectly valid approaches, IMO.)

And FWIW, I think Varenne's suggestion that the stories be presented as horror rather than romance was more to emphasize how far from your intent the characters' actions felt to her rather than being intended literally.

[kangels4ever]

The anthology is called Stories on the Go. I received no pay for it, but I did not mind, since my story was joining dozens of others (this is an anthology of flash fiction, i.e. stories of 1,000 words or less).

The peers who review my work (who are also friends I met via EDF) actually give me helpful, rational suggestions when it comes to improving my work. They do not pile on the shortcomings of my work and offer little or no positive suggestions such as Varenne did with her "make it a horror" comment. I wanted to write a sweet boy meets girl story, but instead of saying "Try giving your characters more development in terms of how they know each other," I got "make it a horror," a genre I dislike and do not write.

Do you understand what I am trying to say?

[kangels4ever]

I would like to add that I gleaned a few nuggets of knowledge from Hillwalker and co., but the more I submitted, the more I felt that the shortcomings in my stories were focused on without positive helpful suggestions, which is why I left this forum.

The only reason I returned to defend myself is because I believe in standing my ground. I did not enjoy my treatment here and have finally taken a stance about it.