Ah, the "introspection" issue raises its head again...
Laura, I don't know how many readers/writers who frequent the message boards have taken writing classes beyond what was required in high school. I, for one, haven't, but even I know that
The universal standards of good writing call for a balance of introspection, narrative, dialogue, and action
as you reminded us.
And as I believe has been mentioned during other discussions, it is undeniable that some of the stories in our fandom are weighted more heavily on the introspection side than is "accepted" by the standards taught in school. Does that automatically make them bad stories?
It is an established fact that in the L&C fandom, there are writers who love introspection. There are also many readers who love it as well, otherwise some of these writers' stories would not be as popular as they are. I happen to love it, although I will admit that occasionally there are times when my eyes glaze over a bit, and I feel that perhaps "less is more" would have been a bit better in this case.
There are also respected writers who use very little introspection, as well as readers who much prefer that.
Both POVs should be respected, as everyone has different tastes.
I remember studying books in school - admittedly this was high school English, so perhaps I was too young to know any better - that I didn't enjoy at all, and these were considered "great pieces of literature". They weren't to my tastes, but obviously *someone* considers them great. Would they all line up well under the "universal standards"? How would some of them fare being judged by the criteria listed on the scoring sheet? Perhaps not all that well...
And in a vignette, for example, are you still expected to have the balance of all the elements mentioned earlier? I would think it would be a tough job to fit that all in in so few words, but I'm no writer...
Kathy
