Honest Criticism

"Everything a writer learns about the art or craft of fiction takes just a little away from his need or desire to write at all. In the end he knows all the tricks and has nothing to say," Raymond Chandler.

I've just had some writing of mine not ripped apart but 'analysed' would possibly be the correct word. It’s been compared to Christopher Booker’s Seven Basic Plots as a ‘Rags to Riches’ story.

The critic wants more on how the subject “changes on his fascinating journey. He seemed like a very likeable chap at the beginning and still was at the end. I feel as though you both know that there needs to be this redemption or rebirth moment. As we approach the ending there is a piece on where inspiration comes from and there’s also the piece about family. I feel these are trying to get at the underlying meaning of this journey, but I don’t quite think that the meaning is nailed.”

He is, however, very complimentary in his critique, stating that “I enjoyed it immensely. The beginning is particularly good, reminding me of David Copperfield and Catcher in the Rye. The writing throughout is stylish and progresses at a cracking pace. Generally there is great use of the Triadic Arc throughout, building tension, climax and resolution. Overall I certainly agree that it’s a page turner.”

But what kind of a thicko am I? I fancy myself as a bit of a scribbler but I’ve no idea what the Triadic Arc is. This guy is obviously well read and well versed, and I’m now going to go to one of the platforms at King’s Cross and stand with a dunce’s hat on all day long.

“Most critical writing is drivel and half of it is dishonest. It is a short cut to oblivion, anyway. Thinking in terms of ideas destroys the power to think in terms of emotions and sensations,” Raymond Chandler.