Reply to Re: The Turning - Part One of Two
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
I'm of the opinion that there are two legitimate ways to answer criticism of your writing:
1. Justify what you've written.
2. Change what you've written.
If you choose to justify, and do it well, then you aren't being defensive; you're being logical. So yeah, I didn't think you were being defensive.
The only "sin" one can commit as a writer is to accept the weakness of one's own writing, and I suppose everyone has to do this eventually, otherwise nothing would ever be finished.
On an unrelated note, I disagree with the idea of allowing setup to precede action (excepting flashbacks), so we "agree to disagree" on that point. I have never enjoyed a story which explained motivations before actions.
1. Justify what you've written.
2. Change what you've written.
If you choose to justify, and do it well, then you aren't being defensive; you're being logical. So yeah, I didn't think you were being defensive.
The only "sin" one can commit as a writer is to accept the weakness of one's own writing, and I suppose everyone has to do this eventually, otherwise nothing would ever be finished.
On an unrelated note, I disagree with the idea of allowing setup to precede action (excepting flashbacks), so we "agree to disagree" on that point. I have never enjoyed a story which explained motivations before actions.
