Damn, I'm bad at updating this blog...
A couple of weeks ago I received feedback for the first assignment of my writing course. I shall not reprint the whole appraisal here but shall instead reveal the most interesting except:
"This is certainly a highly effective piece of descriptive writing, with some rich imagery an a good sense of atmosphere. However, I can't help feeling there is a slight tendency to overwrite - to choose and use words or phrases for literary effect rather than simple communication. This means you run the risk of writing above the heads of your prospective audience."
Yeah. That sounds like something I would do. But in my defence the piece I wrote doesn't strike me as hard to read. Sure there's probably some pretentious use of certain words but I'd be surprised if anyone at all read this work and didn't know what I was going on about. Or am I severely overestimating my audience? Not that this piece had an intended audience; it was written purely to describe a location. Had I been writing an extract for children this would have indeed been a fair comment.
This is not bitterness but rather a deconstruction. I absolutely agree and accept the criticism; I like to add a certain poetic bent to my writing which could be problematic for certain genres/audiences. My tutor goes on to say that the first assignment is merely to test the water and isn't a true indication of an individual's abilities. He also commends my ability to establish physical details, outline the situation, generate atmosphere and, rather confusingly, to communicate my thoughts and ideas. Huh, not so hyperbolic now?
All in all a good start that I am pleased with. Now on to assignment two!
This is Frisk,