Perpetual Ruminations

2 Star Butt Chewing

Now, that's a catchy title. It is based on a review I received a little while back. Not too long, about a week, and it was kind of difficult to swallow.

For one thing, it was a story I wrote many years ago. I have thought of doing some editing, but those who know me say to leave it as is. Kind of a image of my steps along the way. It is not a bad story, in fact, everyone who has read it likes it. Well except for the one person in mention here. I know it could be done up better, but again, I like to look at it and see where I was at in my writing then. I also like to see how well I did with so little understanding of this kind of writing. I was, for the most part, brand new.

For another thing, those who have read it here have always given it a pretty high rating, and have liked it. Sure, there has been some corrective criticism in some of the reviews, but helpful things. Not only pointing out some errors in grammar, but some good ideas that could improve the story, or make the next one even better. In other words, even those who have ripped more deeply into this item have done so in a positive manner.

Now, before I go on, I will point out that I do know and understand that everyone has a different approach to things, including reviews. Also, It would be wrong on every level to indicate the individual I write of. Even in giving out story details, it would be easy to find the person and draw negative attention in their direction. This is not my wish at all, and this is not a means of striking out, in any manner, at the person.

Besides, I do not believe the person meant anything hurtful or disrespectful. Even if it came across that way, it's doubtful it was meant that way. And even if it was, I am not so petty as to fling anything back. To each their own opinion, and if it is something that goes against my grain, then so be it. I'm sure I have rubbed a few people the wrong way with no intent to do so, and will again.

Why write about it then? To get it out. It is negative and unproductive, and it needs an outlet to clear it away. If it had anything positive or helpful, this would then indicate that, and would instead help me to reinforce ideas I want to incorporate into my writing. This is the same, only different. I know, it makes no sense, just a silly thing I say some times. It is not the same, it is different, yet it works similarly and therefore the quirky saying.

By putting it down here, I can free up the spot it resides. I can look at it as I write it, and think of what it is and why it needs to be discarded from my thought. This is how my mind works; I write. If something is upsetting to me, I write. If I need direction, I write. If I need an outlet, I write. If I need to find myself, I write. I am a writer -- it is how I think and process information.

In order to do this, I will have to give a name to the person. Let's go with a kind of pun; Rudy. Also, lets not give the actual review, but just the points Rudy shared.

Rudy, after reading one of my stories, reviewed it and gave it 2 stars. Based on Rudy's review, I take this as a high rating.  You see, Rudy did not like the story and says so in a few ways -- The review begins with how Rudy would rather experience the story by the life and hardships of the character instead of a third person telling it. I can understand this, but is this something to rate and review on? Should we rate another on our tastes and preferences? Besides, the main character is dead, his story is being told by a third person.

Next, Rudy tells me my story left him wanting and at odds with the conditions of the story. Again, I can understand. How many times do we read something that goes in a direction different than what we thought? We can even find ourselves questioning things in the story. Again, this is our perception and tastes. We may not like how the story goes, but others do. We may question something in the story, while another relates to it. Is this something to rate an item on?

One of the things Rudy was at odds with is easy enough to understand, if you take the time to actually read the story. It makes no claims one way or the other. It is clear that the information in question is known to a few. Again, it is not anything deeply hidden, it is cleared up at the end, the information was withheld by choice. As to Rudy's question, why would he want it at all. It is again answered if the story is read, not just skimmed over. Besides, Rudy, what does this have to do with how well the piece is written? It does not, it only shows that you did not take the time to read this, but only skimmed through and missed most of what was told. Maybe, Rudy, had you listened to the person telling the story instead of trying to understand the life and hardships of a dead character, you would have figured it out.

As for gaining no insight of the man or his lover, Rudy, think of the question you asked right before. You say I failed at keeping this a part a mystery, then turn around and state that you gained no insight. If you gained not, then the mystery was a success. If you figured the mystery out, then you would have gained the insight. This makes no sense, and really, is not even a part of the story. Nothing here to base or rate on.

Rudy goes on to claim I am masking obvious talent with "poorly-written first person story telling." Um, didn't you say at first you desired first person and complained because this is third person. I would suppose a story written in third person would be piss poor first person. So, can I ask you something Rudy, did you rate this on first person even though it is third person? No wonder you gave a two star rating.

Also, you ask, "Give the reader some credit." I did not review your reading, I did not question it at all until you gave me a review. Speaking of which, aren't you, the reader, suppose to give me, the author, some credit when you review? This, then is where you went wrong; you thought I owed you something and did not come through with my story. Sorry, Rudy, I don't even know you.

Rudy does go on, even more. He says, "Let your characters come alive and speak for themselves."

That is difficult to do in this story, Rudy, the character is dead. Even if I was to bring him back to life, it would change the story completely. What are you looking for? Perhaps you wanted some kind of Zombie story, they are the latest rage.

Rudy finishes up with a couple of interesting directives to help me write better. He tells me to employ third person in my next attempt. What? I thought you wanted me to use first person, to have the character give the story, not a third person relating it. What should it be, Rudy, first person or third person? You really need to make up your mind. Also, how will find a more receptive audience by this. Are people who enjoy third person more receptive than those who enjoy first person? Can't we enjoy both and be receptive to both?

Rudy goes on with a positive note and informs me I posses an incredible talent. Two stars? I thought everything I wrote, according to you, was wrong. I'm not understanding, if I posses incredible talent, why is this story so disappointing to you and why would you say I did it all wrong?

Finally, Rudy ends with this sage advise, "Remove yourself from your story and use your natural talent to place the adventure in the mind of your reader."

"But, Rudy, if I remove myself from the story, I cannot write it. Is this why I need to place the adventure in the mind of the reader, so the reader can write it for me?"

Also, another question, oh wise and insightful sage, "How am I suppose to place the adventure in the mind of another? I do not posses any type of telepathic ability."

Do you think, Rudy, that when an author writes a story, they are doing just that, placing it in the mind of the reader? No, it is just the opposite, the author is trying to place the reader into the story.

In the end, Rudy reveals just why he was disappointed in the story, rated it so low, and chewed my butt out for writing it all wrong.  He says I need to place the adventure in the mind of the reader. The key is in the word, adventure. Rudy, you fool, this is not an adventure, it is not listed as an adventure, there is no adventure in it. I thought the story was a dead give away, but if not, look at the genre,  "Romance/Love, Emotional, Tragedy."

I do understand now, Rudy, why you thought this story so bad, the mystery is no mystery and the adventure -- lacks. If I was reading this, thinking it was suppose to be an Action/Adventure with a hidden Mystery inside, I would think the same. I would not, however, rate it on not meeting my expectations of an Action.Adventure with a hidden Mystery inside, but instead rate it and review it on how well it is written.

There, now it's out, you can see why I feel a bit disgruntled by such a review, and you are likely wondering, "Did T.J. write back to Rudy?"

I did. Not at first, I didn't have time and was not sure what to write. I had received two reviews on the same story that day, one praise and one in condemnation. Like I said, I didn't reply to either, I had no time. When I did reply, I thanked both for taking time to review. I did not churn anything negative back to Rudy, though. I did tell him I was sorry he felt as he did, that he should have rated and review on content, not taste, and directed him to the reviewing handbook so he can hopefully learn a bit about reviewing.

I also had thought of hiding this bad review, but decided not to. It is a review, good or bad, I will leave it. Besides, it does not really even pertain to the story, but it does do a wonderful job for others to see how not to give a review.

"Reading soothes the soul, writing sets it free."