Once again I've missed the fun...

[_rich kelsey]

Runtu said,

“I'm going to be brutally honest here, but when you say you're "positive [you] nailed this first try," it tells me you are an inexperienced writer. I've been writing professionally for more than 20 years, and I can't think of anything I've written that I nailed on the first try. Writing is as much a craft, a trade, as it is an art. Good writing doesn't just come out of your brain onto paper; you have to carefully write and rewrite, and sometimes you even have to scrap stuff that you think is good because people who should know tell you it doesn't work.

An experienced writer doesn't get personally offended by criticism of the writing. He or she learns from the criticism, even the mean-spirited stuff...”

This is exactly how good writing comes about! The best editors rip and tear at my work.

At times I feel no need to improve upon my articles when people are happy with the writing; but I almost always learn from a critic.

[_Analytics]

Do it. Let the reader see how far you have to reach to tear it down.

So, now you're telling me I am going to have to try really, really hard to "tear it down." In other words, you're already chalking my critique up to personal animus or an axe to grind before I've said a word.

I'm not sure there's any point in critiquing anything when the response is spelled out in advance. You're welcome to head over to my blog and go after my writing. You won't hurt my feelings, and I may even learn something from you.

I for one really enjoy your writing, Runtu. I think you should do the critique just for the fun of it. Whether or not he takes it constructively is beside the point.

[_Fifth Columnist]

by the way, why do you claim that you wrote erotica while out of the church when your cached myspace profile clearly contradicts that claim?

Answer the question, SGW!

By the way, did your lawyer tell you that the picture of you modified to include humorous sayings was a clear case of fair use and that if push came to shove, you would lose? I suspect he did. But he also probably told you that the web hosting company might take it down just to avoid the nuisance. It's too bad they did. I would have left it up and said "see you in federal court."

[_moksha]

Is there a link here or at MAD to this erotica?



by the way, not that I would be interested in such a disgusting filthy practice, but is there any good hot robot sex?

[_Runtu]

I for one really enjoy your writing, Runtu. I think you should do the critique just for the fun of it. Whether or not he takes it constructively is beside the point.

Nah, he's already decided how he's going to respond, and I'm not going to do something like that for the fun of it. I should have learned my lesson with Loran; some people will not take criticism in good faith, no matter how constructive it is.

[_asbestosman]

I for one really enjoy your writing, Runtu. I think you should do the critique just for the fun of it. Whether or not he takes it constructively is beside the point.

Nah, he's already decided how he's going to respond, and I'm not going to do something like that for the fun of it. I should have learned my lesson with Loran; some people will not take criticism in good faith, no matter how constructive it is.

I confess that I'm curious about why you don't think SGW's story was well-written (I've only read snippets from mock-quotes). I honestly don't know what makes good or bad writing style. Sure, "wet rain" is weird, but I'm not sure it's all that bad. I've never been a fan for multiplying descriptions, but I figure that's just me. Many of my friends tell me that's just how stories go--I don't enjoy much fiction. I would love to know where the mistakes lie so I can avoid them myself.

That said, I agree with you that criticizing SGW's writing is a bad idea. I can learn in other ways. If you wish to criticize my writing, I'm open to tips. I've noticed lately that I'm too repetitive in certain phrases and also state some things awkwardly. The problem is that I don't know how to fix it. I will probably visit your blog to see if it helps. I feel I have difficulty expressing my thoughts clearly without using repetitive phrases. My problem may also be that I don't tend to use descriptive words for anything other than humor or biting sarcasm.

One site I enjoyed perusing for a while was tvtropes.org, but I mostly used it to get an idea of techniques used in television or video games, not writing.

[_Kevin Graham]

I guess Pahoran will claim he's not here to defend SGW either. LOL!

This thread is hilarious. Pahoran trots in here with his so-called "facts" hoping to make us all look stupid. Talk about your all time backfires. Virtually everything he said was wrong, obviously because he had gotten his "facts" from the folks at MADB. Classic.

And SGW claims his erotica was nothing to be ashamed of, or to apologize for, even though he quickly removed it once he realized someone here had discovered it.

Nemesis is having a meltdown in public, and all this in the wake of the Will Schryver dilemma.

We're only in June, and this is already a horrible year for LDS apologetics.

[_Blixa]

It could be by your own logic. There were perps who were never excommunicated, although a few others were. By your logic, the LDS church is, indeed, collectively guilty.

Except the church excommunicated all the guilty parties and consistently condemned the crime.

Although beastie has already responded to this, I want to go even further. Nothing in your statement is true. Not one thing.

Repeating these kind of ignorant claims, especially at this point in history, does the Mormon church no favors. In fact, it insults the memory of those brave believing members who, for well over a hundred years, fought against the very lies you are repeating, sometimes at the cost of their own lives.

[_Runtu]

I confess that I'm curious about why you don't think SGW's story was well-written (I've only read snippets from mock-quotes). I honestly don't know what makes good or bad writing style. Sure, "wet rain" is weird, but I'm not sure it's all that bad. I've never been a fan for multiplying descriptions, but I figure that's just me. Many of my friends tell me that's just how stories go--I don't enjoy much fiction. I would love to know where the mistakes lie so I can avoid them myself.

To quote E.B. White, "Vigorous writing is concise." As you said, "multiplying descriptions" is not a mark of good writing. Hemingway famously wrote a story with six words: "For sale: baby shoes, never worn." It's brilliant because it says so much with so few words; bad writing is more often than not writing that says so little with so many words.

That said, I agree with you that criticizing SGW's writing is a bad idea. I can learn in other ways. If you wish to criticize my writing, I'm open to tips. I've noticed lately that I'm too repetitive in certain phrases and also state some things awkwardly. The problem is that I don't know how to fix it. I will probably visit your blog to see if it helps. I feel I have difficulty expressing my thoughts clearly without using repetitive phrases. My problem may also be that I don't tend to use descriptive words for anything other than humor or biting sarcasm.

Writing just takes practice and revision. The problem with message boards and such is that we tend to type and send it off without revision. My blog is pretty sloppy because of that. If you're serious about being a better writer, pick up Strunk & White's "Elements of Style" or Joseph Williams's "Style: Toward Clarity and Grace."

One site I enjoyed perusing for a while was tvtropes.org, but I mostly used it to get an idea of techniques used in television or video games, not writing.

Writing also depends on the purpose and the context. But there are definitely some guidelines. Usually when I have to write something formal, I just brainstorm and write down whatever I am thinking on that subject, and then I'll go back and rearrange it into a coherent structure, and then I'll start editing and revising until it's what I want.

[_Runtu]

Although beastie has already responded to this, I want to go even further. Nothing in your statement is true. Not one thing.

Repeating these kind of ignorant claims, especially at this point in history, does the Mormon church no favors. In fact, it insults the memory of those brave believing members who, for well over a hundred years, fought against the very lies you are repeating, sometimes at the cost of their own lives.

asbestosman, read Blixa's posts for some examples of excellent writing, this one, for example.