
Why I wrote a damning review of my own debut novel - samclemens
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/sep/30/julian-barnes-on-writing-metroland
======
failrate
I am tempted to try this on some unfinished projects to try to suss out their
flaws that I only subconsciously am aware of.

~~~
an_ko
In a similar vein, I start projects by writing a README. It forces me to see
with the user's eyes, which makes the difference obvious between what I think
is a good interface and what is _actually_ a good interface. It has worked
well. I recommend it!

~~~
johncoltrane
There's a big flaw in your method: users never read the README.

~~~
douche
Github displaying readme.md by default has probably boosted viewings of
readmes by a million percent.

Whether _reading_ of readmes has gone up is still an unsettled question

~~~
iamcreasy
what does .md stand for?

~~~
rexf
markdown

------
pashapiro
When writing a work of fiction, the aim is to find truth not in the creative
process, but in the un-dogged pursuit of verisimilitude - in the attempt to
build reasonably causal events in response to the creative flights of fancy.
Theoretically, it should be possible to achieve this in the frontal lobe, but
putting pen to paper has always been a more effective approach at striking the
perfect balance.

I'd say the author here decided to apply the same muscles that balance
creativity and verisimilitude to his own review. Imagining the response to an
unknown, unpublished novel is obviously a work of creativity, which he is also
able to balance out because he actually knows the novel, knows its strengths
and weaknesses.

In this way, he was able to find a simple, comforting truth: he was either
about to become a novelist, or he wasn't.

Writing a piece of pseudo-fiction like this review seems like a great answer
to allay the fears of failure.

------
sverige
Writers can be so critical of themselves, especially good ones, I think.
Barnes' solution of writing the critique he fears is pretty good. They're only
novels, after all, but when you write one, it seems so damned important.

------
Theizestooke
Because it's a neat marketing trick.

~~~
wodenokoto
I didn't catch where he described it as marketing trick, but I also didn't
manage to find anywhere in the article where he actually answers the question
in the title

------
twotwotwo
It can be kind of a relief to freely acknowledge the reasons your thing might
suck, one way or another. Ideas can somehow be less scary written down than
when just hanging around as possibilities in your head. If you think your bad
self-review is the only reasonable way to look at things, then maybe you have
a real problem, but hopefully your reaction is to put it in perspective
somehow--to consider the good things balancing the bad, or why the objections
aren't valid or aren't fatal, or at least that the world keeps spinning and
you are not your work. And then when life or other people's reactions come
around, your reaction is a bit less surprised and maybe more grounded.

