I wrote a short story this week which I thought was good. I wrote it for a website where you can get peer review for your work, including markings. Although I got entirely positive comments from two of the three markers the average score was disappointing. Also the third marker said that he or she would have liked more characterisation.
When I read my piece again, and talked it over with my trusty home critic, I recognised that the comment about characterisation was fair. I think now I was being complacent about what I’d written. My trusty home critic says, and I think he’s right, that I tend to see my work as good or bad, never anything in between. He has a point.
There is something else I’m musing on. I’m immersed at present in the writing of a novella, in which I certainly hope I am creating believable characters! Maybe in writing this short piece in the middle of working on the longer one I carried over my internal thoughts on at least one character who has similarities to someone in the longer piece. Something to be careful about.
A similar thing happened when, a while ago, I wrote a story from the point of view of one person and subsequently from another’s point of view. The second one didn’t work so well, and when I thought about why it was because of my assumptions from the first story, which people reading the second without the first didn’t and couldn’t understand.