And, of course, the woman died about six months later of Leukemia, and I'm like, crap, crap, crap, why couldn't I have just kept my big mouth shut?!, but the point of this story is that, to me, a Mary Jane is someone without flaws.
Well, don't feel guilty. You gave her your honest opinion and you were trying to help her. It's always the hardest damn thing to give someone back a negative review of their fiction, especially when you see that they're so invested in it and that they've poured so much time and energy and love into it.
It's better that you treated her the same as everyone else and gave her your true opinion. The fact that she died later on of leukemia is tragic, for her and those who loved her, but you didn't know. She obviously went to that writer's group hoping to improve her writing.
It isn't just about having no flaws though. I think that a Mary Sue is deeper than that. I think that sometimes authors will design artificial flaws to give the character a depth they don't possess, and readers are smart cookies. They sniff that out without fail by the end of the first chapter.
People argue with you about your reviews, really?! Tell them to go write their own reviews :-)
They didn't argue with the reviews, just a statement (to fair, it was in question form) that I'd made. And I definitely invite people to debate and discuss and even disagree with any and all of what I post on my LJ. I like when people bring new views to the table, and I like having to chew on something for a while to see what I can spit out (which is kind of a gross metaphor if taken literally).
So far, nobody has disagreed with me about the quality of the book - I'm sure there were people who liked it infinitely better than I did, but none have chimed in thus far.
no subject
Well, don't feel guilty. You gave her your honest opinion and you were trying to help her. It's always the hardest damn thing to give someone back a negative review of their fiction, especially when you see that they're so invested in it and that they've poured so much time and energy and love into it.
It's better that you treated her the same as everyone else and gave her your true opinion. The fact that she died later on of leukemia is tragic, for her and those who loved her, but you didn't know. She obviously went to that writer's group hoping to improve her writing.
It isn't just about having no flaws though. I think that a Mary Sue is deeper than that. I think that sometimes authors will design artificial flaws to give the character a depth they don't possess, and readers are smart cookies. They sniff that out without fail by the end of the first chapter.
People argue with you about your reviews, really?! Tell them to go write their own reviews :-)
They didn't argue with the reviews, just a statement (to fair, it was in question form) that I'd made. And I definitely invite people to debate and discuss and even disagree with any and all of what I post on my LJ. I like when people bring new views to the table, and I like having to chew on something for a while to see what I can spit out (which is kind of a gross metaphor if taken literally).
So far, nobody has disagreed with me about the quality of the book - I'm sure there were people who liked it infinitely better than I did, but none have chimed in thus far.