An Intimate Look at One Writer’s Feedback
One of the things I do in my writing life is provide personal story analysis and coaching. The result of this process is a document that offers my thoughts on what works, what doesn’t, why, and how to make the project better.
It isn’t always pretty. Which means, it isn’t always fun, from either side of the transaction. But it’s almost always productive, and it becomes a fascinating clarification and validation of the principles of storytelling.
And it proves that writing a publishable story is much harder than it looks.
Last week I posted an analysis of a story that is highly polished and nearly ready for submission. It was an outline, but comprehensive enough for readers to see the story in great depth.
Today I’m posting another analysis, this time on a full manuscript.
The author has courageously and generously granted permission to reprint it here, with the intention of showing the process to other writers and allowing them to benefit from what is, in this case, some tough feedback.
The writer is good. His story isn’t, despite some compelling elements. Not yet, anyway. Both writer and story require a good bit of polish before they can move forward together toward publication.
The document itself is massive, almost 26 single spaced pages of feedback. It’s like an ebook, and its yours to read here.
There’s a lot to analyze and discuss about any story, ready or not.
Some writers submit their work in the secret hope of affirmation. For them this type of feedback hits hard. Others submit their story in the honest hope of receiving coaching that will make their story better.
This document will show you what this looks like.
It’s like a clinic. Even though it’s not your story, it could be. It drills into the basics you read about here on Storyfix, and hear about in every writing workshop you’ve ever attended.
Click HERE to read it.
Make some time for this. It may not be fun, but it’s full of information, and from a context you don’t normally experience as a student of storytelling.