# Why am I so horrible at judging the quality of my writing? My hypothesis:



## BWFoster78 (May 8, 2015)

When I finished the 4th draft of my novel, I honestly thought I'd send it to the editor; she'd make a couple of minor comments but offer mainly praise; and I'd hit "Publish" on Amazon.

Let's just say that that wasn't what happened.

A long while and a complete rewrite later, I'm reflecting on that experience.

Looking back at the manuscript through the lens of the editor's comments  - Most of the scenes had zero tension; the ending was horrid; and, by the end of the book, the epic fantasy became a YA romantic drama.  And those are just some of the highlights of the dreadfulness.

First thought: maybe I just didn't know any better.  Maybe I had zero taste back then, and, now that my eyes have been opened, I have more taste.

Possible, but I don't think that's it.  I was able, even then, to identify similar issues in books that I didn't write.  In fact, I am absolutely positive that, if I suffered a hit to the head that caused me amnesia, I would have hated my 4th draft even at that moment of submission.  

So why couldn't I see that then?

Here's my hypothesis:

Writing is the act of using the words to translate the pictures/emotions in my head to create pictures/emotions in the head of readers.  When I read my writing, however, the words serve to remind me of the pictures/emotions that already exist. No creation of pictures/emotions is necessary.

Thoughts? Does the hypothesis ring true? Has this been your experience?

THE BIG QUESTION:

How do I ever get to the point where I can trust my own judgment about my writing?

Thanks.

Brian


----------



## Svrtnsse (May 8, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> THE BIG QUESTION:
> 
> How do I ever get to the point where I can trust my own judgment about my writing?



Short answer: "practice"

Longer answer:
I think this is something that comes with time and experience, but even then it will probably be tricky. From what I understand, it's pretty common practice for writers to put a finished draft away for a while after they've finished it. That way, they'll achieve a kind of detachment from the story that they didn't have right away after they finished it.

I think that attachment to the work is the part that gets in the way of fairly judging the work. I know that's been the case for me on several occasions. I'm being forced to test this out on my own novel at the moment. A friend who's an aspiring editor is going over it to check for issues. She's doing it for free and in her spare time, so it's taken a few months and will probably take some more. I'm happy to let it sit there though. Hopefully it'll get me the detachment from the work that'll allow me to make the necessary edits - without me feeling like I'm killing my babies.

Probably, with experience, the time needed to detach from the work will grow shorter. On the other hand, with experience, the urge to finish the thing as soon as possible just to get it out there, will probably weaken.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 8, 2015)

> Short answer: "practice"
> 
> Longer answer:
> I think this is something that comes with time and experience,



Svrtnsse,

Kind of like:

I did that.

I know that, in general, that is "good."

Therefore, I can trust that the writing is good?

Then, the more "thats" that you can string together, the better?

That's the approach I'm taking at the moment, anyway...


----------



## Svrtnsse (May 8, 2015)

Not necessarily.

I think it's more that little by little you learn to understand the principles for what makes something work and not, and you learn to apply them. At the same time, you're also developing the ability to take a step back from your work and view it without the emotional attachment that comes with things you create on your own.

Knowing what building blocks ("thats") work will definitely be helpful, but I think more in the way of productivity than in quality. If you know that building blocks A and B work, then you can just adapt them to your story and won't have to reinvent the wheel, but you don't necessarily know that A+B will work.

Either way, from what I gather, the best way to get better at writing, is to keep writing.


----------



## Devor (May 8, 2015)

Okay. So.

Usually I assume that my prose has problems.  I try to hard to cram in a lot and things can get a little jumbled.  I'm also too subtle and that can result in issues of clarity.  After that first draft I stare at the words so long that I literally have no idea whether they're any good.  I still see problems, and I still fix things.  But then I have no idea whether it really flows or builds or just sounds awkward or is just boring or confusing or what.

But I'm better with the idea.  The concept.  I have faith in my characters and my stories.  I know it's good.  I know there's tension.  I know there's some kind of awesomeness in what I write.  I just know it.




. . . . don't I?


----------



## Philip Overby (May 8, 2015)

Here's a different hypothesis that I've recently thought more about: I'm not meant to judge my work. I'm meant to write it, polish it, and hope (within a reasonable time frame) that it's ready to go out into the world. I'm leaving it to the people who come across it, critique partners, beta readers, editors, and maybe eventually fans to decide what I'm doing is cool or not. I can sit in front of my computer for hours and hours and think how something sucks or I'm not seeing what works because I'm too close to it. But one thing I keep coming back to is the key component of writing: communication. Meaning my writing isn't meant for only me to look at and ponder its merit. It's meant to be read by other people who can determine their own opinions.

So yes, I think you should learn to be aware of what works and what doesn't. To have as clean a story as humanly possible. But I'm personally to the point where I'm comfortable in my writer's skin, so it's up to me to either hide it away or to spread it around. 

I choose to share it. Because if I don't now, when? Another 5 years? Another 10? Sure, I may be my "Ideal Phil" by then, but I think I'd also be missing out on what writing I'm doing now being read now. And sadly, sometimes I hear people say, "Man, so and so's early stuff is way better than the current stuff." I definitely don't want to go down that road.

I keep hammering in my head "I'm only as good as I can be at that given moment." Meaning 2007 Phil is not going to be as good as 2015 Phil. And 2015 Phil isn't going to be as good as 2019 Phil (hopefully). But if I sit around not being happy with anything I write (which I did from 2002-2012 or so) then I feel like I'm missing the opportunity to let other people determine if what I wrote is good or not.


----------



## Russ (May 8, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> THE BIG QUESTION:
> 
> How do I ever get to the point where I can trust my own judgment about my writing?



As President Reagan said: Trust but verify.

I would suggest that there is a time to be full of trust and confidence in your writing and a time to question everything you write and do.

Let's use a sports analogy.  When you are in the process of doing the act (skating the program, making the shot, whatever) to do the best you can you have to have complete trust in yourself, be in the zone and let yourself flow.  

After the event it is time to accept some words from your coach or the judge, decide which parts of what they suggest you will accept and integrate it, and then go back to performing.

Repeat eternally.

I think times of confidence and trusting your own work are fine, but you need to have times when you tear yourself down so you can make real progress.  You need to make peace with the idea that you will go through both.  Once you have experienced it a number of times and found your own balance between the two it will get easier.


----------



## skip.knox (May 8, 2015)

No, you're right. You're a terrible judge of your own work. And I of mine.

I try to distinguish between two, qualitatively different, kinds of "done". I call them presentable and publishable. I can judge the first, but I cannot judge the second. 

I agree also that the author is too invested in his own world to judge his own story. It's exactly as you say--we have more than just the story, we have the whole world, the whole backstory in our heads. So the story resonates in ways it cannot for the reader. I think of it like a family reunion. For the family members, there are surprises and reminiscences and old injuries that add layer upon layer to the conversations. But for the new husband invited for the first time, it becomes a blur of names and jokes he doesn't quite get. He has to take the thing on its surface.

One can tune one's ear. To go for another metaphor, the music (or book or movie) critic has tuned his ear. The casual listener just hears the song. The critic can hear the production. The critic is better suited to an objective evaluation. 

We can do some of this, mainly by becoming beta readers for other people. One really does learn much that way, and I believe it has helped me be a better critic of my own work. Better, but not sufficient. I still need to have my own beta readers *and* good editors. I can get my story to the presentable stage, but I need outside eyes to get it publishable.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 8, 2015)

> Either way, from what I gather, the best way to get better at writing, is to keep writing.



Amen.

In the end, I don't know if I'm a "good" writer or not, but I can say 2 things with absolute certainty:

1. I am a much better writer than I was.
2. I am not as good a writer as I'm going to be.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 8, 2015)

> Here's a different hypothesis that I've recently thought more about: I'm not meant to judge my work. I'm meant to write it, polish it, and hope (within a reasonable time frame) that it's ready to go out into the world. I'm leaving it to the people who come across it, critique partners, beta readers, editors, and maybe eventually fans to decide what I'm doing is cool or not.



Philip,

I get that point.  I really, really get that point.

Here's a counter point, though:

In a way, the only opinion about my writing that really matters is my own, not any of those other people you mentioned.

No matter how "good" I get, I will be able to find people who hate my writing.  No matter how bad I've ever been, there have been people who have liked it.

The true test, to me, is how I like my writing.

Therefore, the issue is, how do I know if I like my writing? 

I don't know about you, but I'm confused.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 8, 2015)

Devor,

Exactly!


----------



## Steerpike (May 8, 2015)

One important skill is to be able to read as both a writer and just as a reader (for any work, but particularly with respect to your own). Sometimes this involves setting it aside and putting some distance between yourself and the work. When you're going over your drafts in 'writer' mode, you're going to miss a lot of things (particularly things like emotion, tension, and the like) that you'll be able to pick up easier if you can cast the critical mind aside at times and just read through your work as though you're a non-writer fan of fantasy who just picked it up off the shelf.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 8, 2015)

Steerpike,

I'm just not sure that's possible for me.

Again, my hypothesis is that my words simply make me recall what's already in my head instead of having to create something in my head.

Distance certainly helps, but I'm not sure I can ever view my writing completely from the outside.

Not sure if my hypothesis is correct, but it certainly seems to ring true to me.


----------



## skip.knox (May 8, 2015)

Ah, that's a kettle of fish of a different color.

I alternately love and hate my writing. Sometimes several times before breakfast. I am trying to stop caring whether I like the thing and concentrate solely on getting it done. I'll leave the liking to other people.

The key moment for me came when I thought about certain books that I once liked but upon re-reading found either bored me or which I actively disliked. It's the same book. The same thing almost certainly will happen to me. I just want readers to like my story, but it's highly likely some of them will like it one day and dislike it another. Not only there ain't no pleasing some folk, there ain't no pleasing the *same* folk. 

In such a world, the only reliable measures are these:  written, and published.  That's it.

The rest I leave to the wayward reader.


----------



## Steerpike (May 8, 2015)

@BWFoster:

I find it helps me, when trying to judge what I've written, but admittedly it's not the easiest thing to do. I can do it with other people's writing no problem, but it takes a real effort to do it with my own.

I think your hypothesis is on target. You, as the creator, already feel the emotions, tensions or otherwise, that go along with your story. They're the impetus, in part, for your creation of the story. Part of the creative force. 

If you can somehow "forget" those feelings you already bring into the story, then it is easier to see if the story itself will generate them. It's a similar issue in a way to clarity of writing. When you know what you meant to write, you're reading your sentences with that knowledge, and it is hard to look at it as an outsider who doesn't know what you know.

One thing that sometimes helps is to read the work aloud. This helps a lot with pacing and word flow, but it might even help you get a feel for whether your words are creating a certain emotional impression in and of themselves or whether they seem more flat.

I don't know. But I agree this is largely a learned skill over time.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 8, 2015)

Steerpike,

Would that we could all induce selective amnesia on ourselves on command.  I think we'd all become better writers!

It does certainly seem like, once I "learn" a particular skill/aspect of writing, that particular skill/aspect becomes better.  Take tension, for example.  I put a lot of effort into learning/understanding tension.  I think that now, even on my first draft, I do a much better job of incorporating tension without even really thinking about it.

The problem is that there are so, so many aspects to writing.  I don't even know everything that I don't know at this point.


----------



## Steerpike (May 8, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> The problem is that there are so, so many aspects to writing.  I don't even know everything that I don't know at this point.



Yes. That's the path to becoming an expert in any area I suppose. The only thing I can think to do is practice, practice, practice, and read, read, read.

Also, reading across genres is important in my opinion. Want to see how to create scene-turning tension? Read the best-selling thrillers by authors who are known for keeping tension up to the point where readers just have to read one more chapter. Want to learn how to create psychological terror or instill dread? Read some horror authors who are very good at it. Want to learn more about dealing with the romantic plots in your work? Read books by skilled romance authors and see how they handle it. And so on.


----------



## Philip Overby (May 8, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> Philip,
> 
> I get that point.  I really, really get that point.
> 
> ...



Yes, in some ways I agree. That you have to be comfortable in your own skin before you want to release anything to the public. For me, the key to know if I like something is this:

1. I wrote it to completion.
2. It didn't look like complete crap.
3. It reads mostly OK.
4. It can be edited.
5. I'm excited to see what others say about it.

That's when I know something is good in my estimation. It is made great through a lot of revision. And even then, it might still not be good enough for some. I do think if you're writing only to impress yourself you're kind of heading down a lonely road that may never have answers. But I do think saying, "This is pretty good" is a step in the right direction.


----------



## Philip Overby (May 8, 2015)

Steerpike said:


> Yes. That's the path to becoming an expert in any area I suppose. The only thing I can think to do is practice, practice, practice, and read, read, read.
> 
> Also, reading across genres is important in my opinion. Want to see how to create scene-turning tension? Read the best-selling thrillers by authors who are known for keeping tension up to the point where readers just have to read one more chapter. Want to learn how to create psychological terror or instill dread? Read some horror authors who are very good at it. Want to learn more about dealing with the romantic plots in your work? Read books by skilled romance authors and see how they handle it. And so on.



I actually read some thrillers after getting in a slump with reading fantasy for a while. And I saw something I never saw in myself. So I sat down and wrote a thriller. I'm on the last chapter. I never thought I would do that, but it opened something up inside me. And I've taken some of what I've learned from reading thrillers and applied it to my fantasy writing. Namely dialogue and pace. But I think what I write is probably most closely associated with sword and sorcery. Heavier on action and dialogue with a faster pace.


----------



## Russ (May 8, 2015)

Philip Overby said:


> I actually read some thrillers after getting in a slump with reading fantasy for a while. And I saw something I never saw in myself. So I sat down and wrote a thriller. I'm on the last chapter. I never thought I would do that, but it opened something up inside me. And I've taken some of what I've learned from reading thrillers and applied it to my fantasy writing. Namely dialogue and pace. But I think what I write is probably most closely associated with sword and sorcery. Heavier on action and dialogue with a faster pace.



I too have taken to reading and studying thrillers to try and improve my fantasy writing.  I don't think I will ever write a thriller I have learned a lot from studying them and reading what the best thriller writers have to say about how to write well.  There is a reason they sell so many of those things and people just eat them up.


----------



## Steerpike (May 8, 2015)

@Russ:

If you've never read any of the Bosch books by Michael Connelly, or the Pike/Cole novels by Robert Crais, I find those two authors are very good at thrillers and keeping the pages turning. Lee Child does pretty well too, with his Reacher novels, although sometimes Reacher is a bit too good at everything.


----------



## Svrtnsse (May 8, 2015)

One thing I did recently, which was very rewarding, was to rewrite an old short story. I took one of the first ones I wrote back when I first started out writing a few years back and used it as the basis for a rewrite. It is for all intents and purposes the same story, just written at my current technical skill level.

Doing this, I found that not only had I improved significantly, but I found I could also tell why the newer version is better. I'll probably go back and rewrite the same story again in a few years, just to see how I'm progressing.


----------



## Russ (May 8, 2015)

Steerpike said:


> @Russ:
> 
> If you've never read any of the Bosch books by Michael Connelly, or the Pike/Cole novels by Robert Crais, I find those two authors are very good at thrillers and keeping the pages turning. Lee Child does pretty well too, with his Reacher novels, although sometimes Reacher is a bit too good at everything.



I have enjoyed Connelly but not Crais yet.  I will add him to the reading list.

I also quite like Steve Berry's Cotton Malone books because of the historical research he puts into them and the interesting settings.  I do have a bias though as Steve is a friend of  mine.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 8, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> Here's my hypothesis:
> 
> Writing is the act of using the words to translate the pictures/emotions in my head to create pictures/emotions in the head of readers.
> 
> When I read my writing, however, the words serve to remind me of the pictures/emotions that already exist. No creation of pictures/emotions is necessary.


Yes. As the writer, we have the benefit of knowing  the scene's intention, the ideas which generate the words. The reader has only the words on the page. In my opinion, this is the number one reason that writing well is so damned hard and takes so much work.



BWFoster78 said:


> THE BIG QUESTION:
> How do I ever get to the point where I can trust my own judgment about my writing?


We're close to the same point in our writing careers, so I can only answer with what I hope will be the case.

I hope that experience will make this easier...okay, maybe not easier. That's not going to happen. Maybe experience will make us better at conveying our intention, the conflict, and the emotion of the scene. Time will tell.

But, keep in mind, even the most experienced of writers still employ editors. There's obviously a reason and a m quite certain it's not all for the sake of grammar.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 8, 2015)

skip.knox said:


> I think of it like a family reunion. For the family members, there are surprises and reminiscences and old injuries that add layer upon layer to the conversations. But for the new husband invited for the first time, it becomes a blur of names and jokes he doesn't quite get. He has to take the thing on its surface.


I love this analogy Skip. Permission to use this, please?
I probably will anyway, at some point, but it's polite to ask.


----------



## Devor (May 8, 2015)

When it comes to the prose, I think BWFoster's "hypothesis" is pretty accurate.  We can do our best to try and separate ourselves from the work and learn some techniques for trying to write with a strong voice.  But as others have said, we already know what the words are supposed to mean.  We can never read it for the first time.

But, I don't think this means that we can't judge the quality of our own stories.  It's not like we're helpless against this fact.  As you work at it your prose should get better, especially when you start to work with an editor.  As T.Allen likes to say, writing clearly is pretty close to the same as thinking clearly.  And experienced writers can get very consistent with their writing voice - a good voice can mean good prose.  It's not like we're doomed to delusionally writing crap for our entire careers.

And your story concept adheres to a similar set of rules.  If you work the creative muscle long enough, you'll know when your ideas are strong, compelling, or failing.

Don't get me wrong.  Nothing's perfect.  Nobody's perfect.  We're never going to be objective about ourselves.  But let's be real.  Writing is work and a bundle of skills just like anything else.  It's not magic.  And there's no magical, philosophical boundary preventing us from doing well, or from knowing when we've done a good job of it.

A little self-doubt can be healthy.  But if you thought it was good and it turns out to suck, that just means you've got that much more to learn.


----------



## ThinkerX (May 8, 2015)

I have found that approaching some of my work 'cold' - that is stories and parts thereof I abandoned years (and sometimes decades) ago makes a difference.  Every now and again, I'll blunder across such a piece, open it with a wince, and go...

'wow - this is a lot better than I remember!'

or

'Ugh...no wonder I stopped working on this.'  

With stories that have sat in digital limbo that long, a bit of objective judgment on the authors part is possible.

It also helps that I have read a lot of books - fantasy, SF, thrillers, mysteries, and so on - probably more than most of the other posters here.  It gives me a sort of collective sense as to what works - what will grip the reader - and what won't.  Past few years, I have noticed that if the tale is going in a wrong or boring direction, my daily word count plummets.  I have to stop and think every other sentence it seems.  Sometimes this is, 'ok, this part of the plot is extra tricky.'  But other times it means I took a wrong literary turn.  (I do have a bit of a blind spot with worldbuilding, though).


----------



## skip.knox (May 8, 2015)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> I love this analogy Skip. Permission to use this, please?
> I probably will anyway, at some point, but it's polite to ask.



Of course. All my analogies are available. I keep 'em next to my dialogies and monologies, but in front of the syllologies, which are too sylly for words.


----------



## Penpilot (May 9, 2015)

BW, I think your hypothesis is on solid ground. It's similar to something I learned a while back. Being a new writer I learned a bunch of "rules" and took them to the extreme without understanding how to really apply them. One of the "rules" I took to the extreme was show not tell. 

When you show too much it becomes vague... really vague. But when I read my stories, they made sense because I knew the context, which gave me solid footing in understanding what was happening. But the reader had no such context, so were left on a slippery slope.

This made me realize just because something makes sense to me, it doesn't mean it makes sense to the reader. I realized I had to give the reader enough information so they could understand things the way I do. This brings me to Steerpike's comment about being able to view your own work as a reader.

I remember a Writing Excuses episode where they talked about turning off the internal editor and how difficult it was for them when they started out. They said they couldn't just enjoy reading a book or watching a movie. They had to analysis it. They said it took them a while, but eventually they were able to just turn off the editor and just enjoy something as an audience member.

It can be tough thing to do, but it's not impossible. For me, I found that when I edited the crap out of something, there would be a point where I started to hate it, thus removing a lot of the emotion attachment, so I could see the story more clearly. 

Editing the crap out of something usually consists of editing sessions morning, noon, and night. I found this to be a useful tool in sussing out issues.

The morning is where I'm most awake. I find that at this time I spot the logic errors more easily, but it's also the time where I feel the least emotional. At night, I'm tired and spotting logic errors is difficult, but this is also the time where I'm most emotional. Noon was somewhere in between these extremes.

What's my point? If a scene can stir an emotion from me in the morning, that's a sign I'm doing OK in that department. If it passes the logic test, same thing.

At night, if I spot a logic error, it tends to be a big one because even the sleepy me can spot it. If a scene can't stir an emotion at this time, there's a good chance it's emotionally flat. It's also at this time I think it's most easy for me to read like the audience because it's when I have the least desire to analyse. 

If a scene passes these check points multiple times, then I have reasonable confidence that it's fine. And my judgement is often confirmed or corrected by my writing group. A lot of times they point out things I already suspected aren't working.

I'm not saying what works for me will work for you. What I'm saying is as you write and edit and write and edit some more, try not only to understand the story, but understand a bit about your writing self. IMHO that's helpful in developing a better critical eye towards your own work.

For me, I understand that the time of day and how tired I am affects how I perceive my writing, and I try to take advantage of that.

Hopefully some of this makes sense. It's a bit late where I am.


----------



## cupiscent (May 9, 2015)

To a certain extent, I agree with the prevailing advice through this thread - that, as the author, you're never going to be able to look at your work with fresh eyes unclouded by all the things you thought you put on the page. It's hard to see exactly what you _did_ put on the page. There are two things that I think are invaluable to help here: 1) distance, and 2) other people.

Whenever I finish a story, I stick it in a drawer, and go do other things for a while. I read a lot of fiction, and I read a lot about fiction. I write something new. I critique other people's work. And then, after as long as I can stand - at least a month, sometimes longer if I'm exhibiting amazing patience - I come back to my work and read it over, trying my hardest to see what's there. Then I start revising.

When I've done that at least once, sometimes more times, I will hand the story over to other people. I have about a dozen people I ask for feedback, which means I can usually get about half-a-dozen opinions on any one story. I think more than one reader is essential, because what's obvious to one person isn't at all to another. And my rule here is that I don't get to answer back or explain. The readers only get what's on the page. If they get the "wrong" idea, that's my fault. I need to make what's on the page clearer. (I used to freelance as an editor. I cannot count the number of times an author responded to my editorial notes with explanations of why they didn't have to change things. As an author, your only medium for explaining things to the reader is the story. Put it in the story.)

Having gone through this with a number of stories now, I think I'm getting better to start with. I have more of an understanding of how people who aren't me consume fiction. I have a better idea of what I need to put on the page to convey the story. But the acid test of whether I've been at all successful is still distance, and other readers.


----------

