Part 4 – Truth and Reconciliation
I have been recently informed that my work is a piece of "sophistry", or "Sophism", and that it is the very worst of sophism that one can achieve. If you are not familiar with sophism, allow me to supply the definition:
Sophism: a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone
So basically, I have been called out, because it is apparently assumed that I am using creative reasoning, passion, and a decent argument, in order to deceive you all. However, wouldn't one think that if I was attempting to deceive, I wouldn't be working towards the common good? Also, since the technical definition of deceive, is "to be false or dishonest with," I cannot see how I've deceived anyone at all. I have been one-hundred percent honest in all three prior parts of this essay. This website is horribly separated, and reviews calling me out on account of "sophism" are perfect proof of that.
How can someone who just wants to see a united community be a sophist? I'm not trying to unite you all for some form of global takeover, I have no ulterior motives, and not once have I contradicted myself. I have corrected myself, but never been two-faced on this subject at all. I apologize if that has come across unclear at all, but hopefully, my true intentions can shine through.
The one argument I see the majority of my reviewing audience having difficulty swallowing is the fact that, even though there may be a large amount of authors on this website that they on and individual level find, for lack of a better term, repulsive, that does not give them the right to factually declare them "crap", or any expletive you choose to use, beyond saying "I feel from my own experiences, that in my opinion, a good portion of the works I've read here have been below my expectations."
Now needless to say, that phrase is very wordy and repetitive but, in the long run, any variation of it is much better then "Believe me, ninety percent of all the work here is shit".
The reason I say that is because chances are you have not read ninety percent of all the work on this website, and even though you, yourself, have found a majority of works that are displeasing to you, as hard as this may be to believe, there may be a reader out there who enjoys reading it. Therefore, the biggest pill to swallow here is the fact that what you have to say is opinion, and even though there is absolutely nothing wrong with having an opinion, the way you are currently stating it is very discouraging and creates a very poor breeding ground for potential authors.
My intentions here are not to prove that everyone here is a quality author. That is not only impossible, but a ludicrous idea from the start. Chances are there is a larger majority of authors here with quality issues, than there are of authors without them. Mind you, this is only my opinion, and not necessarily a fact. My true intention is to unite us all in an attempt to assist each other in becoming quality authors, using each other to the height of our potential to gain experience and constructive criticism, therefore increasing that lack of quality, and also increasing our sense of community.
I will not ask you "Who are you to judge?" because the whole point of my essay thus far has been to define, who we, as a community are. We have every right to judge each other, because we are all intrinsically the same. We have the same purpose, to write. Therefore the question I am asking is "Who better to judge then us?" I don't think there is anyone better to judge an author than a fellow author, but that in judging we cannot afford to continue confusing opinion with fact.
Also, for the last time, I am asking that this does not get confused with my opinions of flaming. I neither approve nor disapprove of flaming anymore, only because to each and every one of us, "flaming" has a different definition. So where in some aspects flaming may intentionally hurt the reader, other flames can have a tendency to be really helpful in making them a better author. Therefore, I do not feel it is my place, any longer, to judge on the existence of flaming, and have stated my neutrality on this particular subject in this essay before.
The administration of Fiction Press have given us a gift, by allowing us to post freely whatever we want to, to an extent, and then in turn to critique, freely, once again to a similar extent, without any form of pay necessary. But all we seem to be doing lately, is destroying the gift we've been given. I swear, when I first joined this website, there was a beautiful flow amongst authors, with the occasional flame, and unnecessary comment about one's mother or what not, but it was never to the extent that it has become now. I cannot turn the corner without running into comments like "you suck, they suck, everyone here just sucks…and that's a fact." Stuff like that never existed more prominently than it does now, and if we can't curb that, it is only going to get worse. I cannot force, nor do I intend to, change upon you all, all I can do is point it out as best as I can the problem at hand, and with the help of a few of the reviews I've received over time, I've been getting a decent amount of help with that.
I won't stop writing this if I feel the need to continue, but for now I'll just sit back and watch, as other then writing, there is nothing more I can do.
Sincerely,
A Very Disappointed Author
P.S. – I appreciate the "Haxorz" re-enactment of World War II, however I fail to see its relevance, and it leads me to believe there is some sort of relation between Typewriter King and A Very Disappointing Author. So, as creative as it may be, and as funny as it may seem to whomever wrote it originally, I am respectfully asking that any and all reviews of this piece from here on in be relevant to the subject matter only, so that readers don't have to scroll through nonsense to read the reviews. Thank you.