Had my first bad review the other day. It was for "die Stunde X", an alternative history novel I wrote when I was 24/25. Incidentally, I've just finished writing the follow-up to it, but that's a whole different story.
Now, this bad review affected me because, as a writer, all I have is my ability to put words down on paper in an exciting and sensible order to create something readable. But this person, well, to cut a long story short, he said that I switched tenses and that somebody like me, with no grasp of grammar, shouldn't be writing books. I pondered on his criticism. No, scratch that, I raged on his criticism for a few days. And then I read his other reviews, and realized that he'd said pretty much the same thing about every other Indie writer he'd read. The crux of his criticism are these. Firstly, he doesn't like "Americanisms". Well, friend, get with the modern age. Notwithstanding the fact that I wrote "die Stunde X" twenty years ago, the majority of British writers are going to be affected by "Americanisms". We're living in the 21st century. It's how things are. The second thing he has a problem with are continuous tenses. In particular, he doesn't like people writing, "He was sat over there," or "He was stood right there." Now, of course, everyone who has studied English even just to secondary school level will know that these are grammatically incorrect. One would not say, "He was ran over there." Rather, you would say, "He was running over there." However, for reasons that can only be explained away by local dialect, by use of the vernacular, people do actually say, "I was stood right there ..." It's the way people speak. Though it most definitely frowned upon by the Oxford English Dictionary, even they recognize that its usage is rife not only in UK newspapers, but also on the BBC. Call it slang, call it a bastardization of the English language, but that's the way things evolve. Incidentally, I'm presuming that this critic of my work would also take umbrage to me using "-ize" rather than "-ise". God knows I've been pulled up so many times for this in the past, but a simple bit of research will demonstrate that not only is "-ize" acceptable British-English, it is also how we used to write things. Indeed, this is one case where the Brits have got lazy whereas the Americans are sticking to the original spelling.
But in any case, back to the original topic. This critic. Now, not only has he stated (and I'm paraphrasing here) that I'm a useless writer, mainly because, as a self-elected member of the grammar police, he has decided that I don't follow certain rules, he's also done the same to many other Indie writers. The thing is, these guys have sat down and written books. They're Indie writers and we all give them a certain amount of leeway. Unlike like Grisham and Rowling, they don't have a fantastic editorial team behind them to spot these transgressions of continuous tenses and the spelling mistakes (I actually spotted eight in Stephen King's last novel, but what the hell, people shrug because he's a famous writer). What they have done, however, is sat down and written a book. And to those who have never done that, I would say this. Don't criticize mercilessly until you have attempted to write a book yourself. I've written ten, and I think I've learnt a lot since 1994, when I wrote "die Stunde X". Now, I write generally in first person, where I can definitely say, "I was stood over there," because that's common vernacular, and that's the way my lead character would speak. The thing is, the people this guy writes off, maybe they're just starting out, and what they do not need is some banal, three-sentence review telling people that they're basically shit at writing English, and they should go away and do something else. To this person, I would say this. If you want to read something which is finely polished, but ultimately soulless, then purchase books by writers who are published through mainstream publishers, rather than Indie writers or those published through smaller labels. That way, rather than spending £8 on four books which you will absolutely criticize (but would probably actually enjoy if you ditched the grammar police spectacles), you will spend £8 on one book which is so finely crafted, you won't have to criticize it.
In conclusion, I'd say this. Just read and enjoy. Stop worrying about being a member of the grammar police. And sentences can start with "and". Sat over there is a copy of my latest book. But I just remember, you said that sentences can't start with "sat" or "stood" or "but". But why not? Rules are meant to be broken. And the greatest writers in the world break those rules for literary effect. And unless you've actually written a book, perhaps you should just sit down in your accepted role as "reader", and read, rather than edit and criticize.
And remember - there has never been a monument to a critic.
PS - I apologize for spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. And (I shouldn't start a sentence with "and", but for effect (being that this is a forgotten addition to the previous sentence) I have done) typos (was it worth the wait?). Please don't pull me up on them. Once I stopped being a member of the grammar police, I enjoyed myself a lot more and people hated me a lot less.
