u/Papa72199

I am unironically considering taking part in the Hemingway Look-alike Contest in Key West. Maybe not this year, since it's too late, but some other year.

The problem, if there is one? Usually contestants choose to imitate his later in life silver fox look. I, on the other hand, am a young woman. I could, potentially, mimic his look in his 30s, which is when he actually lived in Key West, if I bring all my cosplay skills to bear.

I probably won't win, but should I do it?

ETA: It would be much easier if they also had a Hemingway's wives lookalike contest, with four different categories. (Ok, we have the Hadleys over here, and the Marthas over there...) No such luck, though, afaik.

A lot of people post their writing asking for feedback when in fact they are looking for validation. But what’s wrong with simply asking for validation in so many words? That way, no one is offended or disappointed. People know what to give and readers know what to expect and it’s all transparent.

ETA:

To add to my thoughts on this issue a bit so they're not scattered all over the comments:

Ideally, writers need both validation (cheerleading) and constructive criticism in their craft. At the same time, different people are in different places in their craft and in any given project. They may want and need different types of feedback at different times, and that's valid. Feedback can also span different forums. You don't know that they're not getting constructive feedback elsewhere. Some people may have a trusted friend as an editor or beta, or be working with a professional or a teacher, but they want to "crowdsource" validation. Shockingly, also, some people don't want to improve or go pro, and yet they still want to celebrate a milestone.

No one is forced to give positive feedback or validation, either. It's simply a question of managing expectations so that OP's get what they want and need in that moment, and commenters do not waste their effort.

If you have nothing positive to say, you are free to scroll by. Alternatively, you can say something genuinely nice and keep any negatives to yourself, because most writing has good and bad points. For example, let's say overall the work is mid or poor but you think it has good dialogue. It would be a lie and unhelpful to say "this is amazing!" It would not be a lie nor unhelpful to say "this has good dialogue."

Finally, saying what's working, if it's specific, can be as helpful as constructive criticism. That way the writer can do more of that thing.

I am currently rereading A Farewell to Arms, and one thing that's really speaking to me is Fred and Catherine's attitude toward her pregnancy - namely, what they don't do or say.

Specifically, it seems that while they're in love and want to be together long-term, neither of them is especially happy about the baby. There is no fantasizing about genders or names, or what parenthood would be like, no horribly cliche but common behaviors such as kissing the pregnant belly or trying to interact with the unborn child.

Now, obviously, it is wartime and there is quite a bit of uncertainty. So it's probably not a great time to have a child. And while they want to get married, the fact remains, they are unmarried, which carried quite a bit of stigma at the time. But still, as time goes on neither of them seems to develop much, if any, excitement - even Catherine with her pregnancy hormones. Frederick has a tender moment saying "take care of little Catherine," and he expresses concern about her rowing in her state. But otherwise there are few positive emotions.

But here is what we do have. Catherine essentially implies that she tried to have an abortion ("I tried to do everything," but it didn't work.) She also makes a morbid joke about life being easier if she pops herself in the belly with an oar. She spends a lot of time, in multiple conversations, talking about body image while pregnant. During one conversation, one of them, I forget who, expresses a hope that the baby won't "come between them." They discuss what Catherine can and can't do while pregnant. And of course the birth is horrid and Fred has no parental feeling whatsoever when he finally sees the child.

Now, at the time I would bet this was all fairly revolutionary. Women were supposed to aspire to motherhood, and a rejection of that role and a focus on all the unsavory parts was likely quite... different.

I don't know why, but I keep being obsessed with average sentence length of my works. I tend to naturally write long sentences, since my mind moves quickly and makes mental webs where everything is connected. But I did my best to break that habit, and also break down my sentences.

The resulting average sentence lengths are as follows:

Novel 1 (after extensive edits) and -35K words: just over 15
Novel 2: 14 words
Novel 3 (in progress): 13.5
Short stories: anywhere from 11-15.

But based on my research, this is actually somewhat on the longer end compared to the "sweet spot" for most contemporary authors, who average 10-15.

So should I keep trying to reduce average sentence length, or leave well enough alone?

To some extent, I've diagnosed the problem, if there is one. Scenes with dialogue, action, and immediate experiences and thoughts tend to have shorter sentences. Sometimes very short ones. Exposition, world-building, or characters' interiority tends to run longer. For instance, this is me describing a character's wedding preparations, which occur in a whirlwind, and throwing in a bit of world building:

"And so the wedding took place in a week’s time. But while the time was short, Tevis insisted that every custom be observed, from exchanging rings after Valyria's fashion, to Angmar's ceremony where the couple’s hands were bound with embroidered cloth, to the exchange of gifts, as well as Angmar's custom of Presenting the Horse. This was a practice where the bridegroom’s horse was brought to his beloved’s family, and if the horse passed muster by being fastidiously groomed and evidently well-treated, the suitor was accepted."

I kind of thought the sentence with a list conveyed the whirlwind well. But I could, ostensibly, rewrite it as follows.

"And so the wedding took place in a week’s time. But while the time was short, Tevis insisted that every custom be observed. The couple exchanged rings after Valyria's fashion, and they held Angmar's ceremony where the couple’s hands were bound with embroidered cloth. They exchanged gifts, and per Angmar's custom, there was a Presenting the Horse. This was a practice where the bridegroom’s horse was brought to his beloved’s family, and if the horse passed muster by being fastidiously groomed and evidently well-treated, the suitor was accepted."

However, that gives a different meaning. It states that these things were done, as opposed to the character insisting they were done.

The above does not happen all the time. And as you can see I do vary sentence length. Idk, maybe the problem is all in my head. Or maybe I need to do less exposition overall.

Now and again, I hear about people co-writing novels. In some cultures/countries, it is more common than in others. But I'm curious in general, how do people... actually do that?

I can imagine plotting and kicking ideas around together. I can imagine giving extensive feedback as a beta or an editor. But actually co-writing? That's harder. I mean, do you take turns writing chapters or passages? Do you take turns drafting and editing? How much input does a person need to make to be considered a co-author?

If anyone here does that, can you share your process?

Papa himself gave me the idea in the disclaimer, where he says everyone in the book is real. He said that if there's not enough of a love story, the reader is free to insert their own love interest.

Well, it seems that Hem hardly calls his wife by her name in this book - it's always "my wife," or POM. In which case, I can just imagine that she's someone else. Hadley, even. Or myself, teehee.

Alright, let's goooooo. I like Hem's style so much that I don't care what he writes about - I'll read it. He can rant about women's underwear, for all I care. I can't wait to hear all his crazy takes on writing and the Gulf Stream and on life.

I've become such a Hadley stan after some of the things in A Moveable Feast and The Paris Wife that I hate anything that reminds me that she and Hem had a love, and he even called it his “first and best,” but it was not enough. I don't even like TSAR anymore, knowing it was born out of his emotional infidelity to her. And I've always loved TSAR otherwise.

The fact that Hem cheated on his other wives, oddly enough? I couldn't care less. With Pauline and Martha, maybe it was even poetic justice. But Hadley did Absolutely Nothing Wrong, and she supported him emotionally and financially, and her only potential flaw was... what? That family life eventually bored him? That they had a child and Hem felt the baby was dragging them down? That she lost the manuscripts?

Also I always root for the underdog, and Hadley was perhaps more plain than the women Hem usually went for. So there's that. Part of me can't shake the notion that this is "plain girl discrimination" striking yet again.