erastes

It's was like World War 3 last night with the fireworks. Luckily the kitties were 1. Not interested in going out once night sets in (this is good) and 2. Not frightened by the crashes and bangs. I suspect tonight will be just as bad. Personally I don't celebrate burning catholics, but I do like to see the fireworks out of my window.

I've quit the Historical Novel Writers Critique group because frankly the attitudes of one or two of the members were simply FRIGHTFUL. Some had no idea how to take critique. You might say that "maybe,

erastes, you don't know how to give critique." but I think I do. I've spent many years beta-ing in fandom, and as many critiquing novels by other original fiction writers. Mostly in these two cases I'm been a little more gentle than I was on the group - but if I was a bit less tactful on the group that's because the group was called a Critique group and "for writers who are serious about writing historical fiction and getting published" and I would have thought the clue was in the name.

Anyway the last straw came today when one of the members emailed me today in response to my latest critique and said: -

Some points you raise are useful but as I read I covered three pages with points to refute but decided not to forward all of them to you due to lack of time. The email went on for well over a page anyway, refuting stuff I'd corrected.

*staggered* Three pages?

Three pages of refutation? Now this defensive behaviour is something that I've never encountered before, never. Not once in years of critiquing for fandom. She just thinks she's right in every aspect but (omg) she isn't. I studied the period very very extensively for writing Standish and her historical inaccuracies were legion. She even uses Heyer-isms, which, for the non-Regency steeped, are terms made up by Georgette Heyer and NOT found anywhere in original Regency fiction.

Now I understand about genre fiction, that romance should be written in a particular way (even though I disagree) and blah blah, but when a genre starts making up its own vocabulary and considering it canon, well then... I roll my eyes to the heavens.

It's like some girl I was beta-ing for in Potterdom, who spelled Lucius' name "Lucious" through the entire fic. I pointed this out, quite strongly, that she needed to get this right.

Her response was "I've seen it spelled both ways."

"Yes," I said," but not in the books."

"Oh, I haven't read any of the books." she said.

*headdesk*

This is the attitude that this person seems to have. She doesn't seem to care that her book may not be accurate Regency, as long as it's similar to all the other Regencies that have been written by her contemporaries. I had to wonder if she'd ever read an Austen. In fact - she said recently, in reponse to an earlier critique - that her book was supposed to be "Fantasy Regency" by which I guess she means exactly what I state above. I can't imagine what else she means. Unless there are aliens or something.

The other hilarious thing was that at the end of Chapter 3 she had her heroine walk out of her home for reasons not given (although her mother had just beaten her, so one assumed that was why, but the heroine was so maddeningly NICE and calm you thought she was on mogadon or something) and then at the beginning of Chapter 4 the heroine was getting married!!

In the critique I said "I think you should include the Hero's proposal - it's a vital scene, and the book feels incomplete without it."

her response was: "The proposal was in the original version."

Well, excuse me for not being psychic!

I'd love to see what any editor/agent/publisher would say if she wrote pages of erroneous refutations to them ! I'm not great at taking criticism myself, but I'll put my hands up and admit it if I'm wrong, and I do get it wrong! I had The Field of Mars and Bois de Bologne as the same place and thank goodness someone pointed it out!

Add to that varying snotty attitudes from others who think they are historians - unbelievably shoddy writing from others, appalling levels of research (having Slavery in England for example in the 17th Century, or having a man get from London to Bristol in a day, having had word from Bristol the day before) was enough to make me quit in disgust. I don't mind critting someone's work, but I'll be buggered if I'll do any more of their research for them, and that's what I was having to do. It's tough enough researching my own stuff!

And no-one even bothers to say thank you. And that's just bloody rude.

That being said, there were one or two excellent stories on the group, and not everyone was a prig or a bigot.

ajhalluk was on the group and her story was very good - she (of course) was brilliant about taking critique and knew how to be gracious and informative (not pompous or rude like some) in any refutations she had. She could also spell my name correctly which others (such as bigot above) couldn't manage to do even after several months.

But some took critique as personal attacks, and I don't have to work with such unprofessionalism. If I want to deal with prima donnas write the equivalent of "WTF you Hor everywun else thinks it's BRILLIANT." then I'll go and do a critique of the Draco Trilogy.

The funniest thing about the whole business is that said Bigot who refused to critique my work (because she considered "sex to be for procreation" and homosexuality to be blasphemy) has written (unintentionally) the GAYEST hero you've ever seen. I really really hope she gets published (although she hasn't a hope in hell, as it's a truly awful novel) so that I can write slash about her hero and his best friend.

Really. And she doesn't see that.

Evidence:

1. He's constantly with his best friend
2. He speaks of a girl he loved in Portugal, but said best friend never met her. This smacks of "I DID have a girlfriend, so there! I'm not gay!"
3. There's a truly TRULY homoerotic scene between said BF and hero in the moonlight where they talk of war. It's very very romantic. BF puts his hand over hero's, and hero puts his other hand over BF's. I squeed. Awwwww.
4. He marries the heroine but decides not to sleep with her. Not even a little bit and continues to spend all his time with BF. In fact he's rarely seen out of BF's company.

You be the judges!

I don't get why someone who wants to write historical fiction doesn't feel compelled to get the details as right as they can. If you want to mould and shape a historical period to your own conceptions, then do what George RR Martin does and do an AU history.

Well, that feels better. No more amateur critique groups for me!!