Do you always want authority with the reader? Like if I’m writing an anxious narrator do I want less authority? Or does that just make the whole thing less believable? Would an anxious narrator have no authority or just a touch less?
You always want to retain authority AS THE AUTHOR, you retain authority by creating the narrator as an realistically anxious and possibly an unreliable narrator. You’re retaining the authority, the character must be authoritatively WHAT YOU CLAIM THE CHARACTER IS. Once they believe this, you can do anything with them.
A real honor to be dissected! I am excited to go back and use these insights to make the story the best it can be. The only thing I have to disagree with is simply a mistake that I now see was my fault. I am a man, and my narrator is a man, but by starting right from the top saying "I had stopped sponsoring men in their attempts at recovery..." I created the sense that the narrator was not a man! I'll start the editing right there.
For anyone interested in reading the full story in its current form, here's the link. I'd love to hear more thoughts.
Goddammit I'm going to keep doing them until no one has anything to say of this nature (which considering the churn, will probably be never.) But thank you.
Thank you, I am an insurgent who wants to blow up the gurus and shitbirds who will tell you things less useful than this for more money, doled out in workshops and seminars and courses.
Here's your course, every week, for free. (And my notes. My general content.)
Mind you, I mean the false idols. The get richer quickers. The liars and conmen. There are teachers out there, there are places, workshops, but there are barriers to entry (I've spent and will spend thousands, gladly.)
I will not even pretend I'm not guilty. I'm just not a charlatan. Me and a friend who is also the same sort of editor as me are running an editorial crit workshop in March. It is Short Story Slaughterhouse: An Editorial Abattoir. Seats are $400, there are 12 with one scholarship, and you have to apply.
Some people can write, but they can't make the barriers of these kinds. Some people are insane, like me, and know I've made millions and it all doesn't matter. What matters is what I can do for others. Because I'm really bad at doing for myself.
Simply fantastic. These autopsies are invaluable. Thanks, Emil. And great work, Layne! Excited to read the revised version
Autopsies will always be free and they will run as long as I can do them (ideally until the heat death of the universe.)
Do you always want authority with the reader? Like if I’m writing an anxious narrator do I want less authority? Or does that just make the whole thing less believable? Would an anxious narrator have no authority or just a touch less?
You always want to retain authority AS THE AUTHOR, you retain authority by creating the narrator as an realistically anxious and possibly an unreliable narrator. You’re retaining the authority, the character must be authoritatively WHAT YOU CLAIM THE CHARACTER IS. Once they believe this, you can do anything with them.
A real honor to be dissected! I am excited to go back and use these insights to make the story the best it can be. The only thing I have to disagree with is simply a mistake that I now see was my fault. I am a man, and my narrator is a man, but by starting right from the top saying "I had stopped sponsoring men in their attempts at recovery..." I created the sense that the narrator was not a man! I'll start the editing right there.
For anyone interested in reading the full story in its current form, here's the link. I'd love to hear more thoughts.
Thank you, Emil•
https://laynemercer.substack.com/p/snakelegs
No, thank you, it takes courage to put yourself on a slab in public.
These continue to be super useful
Goddammit I'm going to keep doing them until no one has anything to say of this nature (which considering the churn, will probably be never.) But thank you.
Reading these dissections has fast become my favourite part of the week. I don’t care what day of the week they come.
I’m saving every single one of these. And feeling a massive urge to go back through all my work and dissect it all based on your editorial insights.
So so so incredibly eye-opening. Excellent work Layne, I love this story. Impeccable advice Emil, I have been learning so much.
Thanks Keith. Always appreciate a compliment from someone who is actually in the trenches with me, writing fiction everyday.
Thank you, I am an insurgent who wants to blow up the gurus and shitbirds who will tell you things less useful than this for more money, doled out in workshops and seminars and courses.
Here's your course, every week, for free. (And my notes. My general content.)
Mind you, I mean the false idols. The get richer quickers. The liars and conmen. There are teachers out there, there are places, workshops, but there are barriers to entry (I've spent and will spend thousands, gladly.)
I will not even pretend I'm not guilty. I'm just not a charlatan. Me and a friend who is also the same sort of editor as me are running an editorial crit workshop in March. It is Short Story Slaughterhouse: An Editorial Abattoir. Seats are $400, there are 12 with one scholarship, and you have to apply.
Some people can write, but they can't make the barriers of these kinds. Some people are insane, like me, and know I've made millions and it all doesn't matter. What matters is what I can do for others. Because I'm really bad at doing for myself.