bulmabriefs144
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2021
- Messages
- 274
- Points
- 83
How do you do it? How deal with people who critique your work, when you can't have a civil discussion because they've blocked PMs and chatting? Like, you can't explain why you put this and that in your book because they are unavailable. Me, I want to be liked, even if it doesn't seem that way, so it hurts when someone unconditionally hates my stuff. And not just hates the stuff that I also thought was bad, but doesn't even bother to understand me.
Actually, it's what is known as worldbuilding. I am describing how medicine developed in the 20th and 21st centuries from the perspective of someone in the 70th century where magic is real. In the 16th century, bloodletting was done. That's only four or five centuries of gap, right? Now think of 50 centuries and how different medicine might be.
Science always marches on, even fantasy science. The things you think are so sophisticated today are likely to be scoffed at tomorrow. And yes, I do tend to rant and go on tangents, but this section did have an important reason to be added. "How was Ambrosia healed?" I wanted to answer the question of how medicine works in this world. Being a fantasy world, it rejects what you see as "science" as backwards.
The first chemotherapy was developed following exposure to mustard gas. It has a 90% fail rate, because the body makes stem cells against it. I can show you my research if you like. But you either believe it or you don't.
If you trust your medicine as though it can solve all problems, what happens when your doctor misdiagnoses you? Or gives you a medicine at an overdose? Yes, people do sometimes take drugs because they would like them to work, not because they do work.
But you've missed an important point here. This is an explanation of how people 5000 YEARS in the future are doing medicine. In Discworld, they used to think the world was round, but now know it's a disc on the back of four elephants riding on a turtle. The point being that an author can set up any rules to how science or medicine evolved that they like, and the reader is supposed to suspend their disbelief, even if it's hilarious.
What you want to believe outside of reading my book is up to you, but you've failed at reading the story, I'm afraid.
Because of trust. People like you trust the science, and keep taking medicine even if it makes you cough and gives you warts. Side effects? Who cares?!? "Modern" medicine has continued far longer than it should. I would have thought people would stop taking dangerous drugs long ago, but even a cursory glance at how doctors said thalidomide was "non-toxic" in 1958 despite awful birth defects, yeah that tells me that's not the case. Look up PFOA in your spare time.
I am on the schizo spectrum, yes. But more importantly, I'm worldbuilding. Which I can tell you've never done.
She was trying to leave, and someone was literally killing people who tried to leave without paying, and she gets moved back into line. That was the joke.
Sigh...
Said critic has no public profile, so I cannot chat with them to explain my writing choices. They also don't appear to have written anything. So I have someone who I can't talk to, what hasn't contributed anything meaningful, who wants to put down the way I write. How do I cope with them? I guess I like to publicly mock them. Yes, it's petty. I know.
...So what does everyone do to cope with poor reviews?
Actually, it's what is known as worldbuilding. I am describing how medicine developed in the 20th and 21st centuries from the perspective of someone in the 70th century where magic is real. In the 16th century, bloodletting was done. That's only four or five centuries of gap, right? Now think of 50 centuries and how different medicine might be.
Science always marches on, even fantasy science. The things you think are so sophisticated today are likely to be scoffed at tomorrow. And yes, I do tend to rant and go on tangents, but this section did have an important reason to be added. "How was Ambrosia healed?" I wanted to answer the question of how medicine works in this world. Being a fantasy world, it rejects what you see as "science" as backwards.
The first chemotherapy was developed following exposure to mustard gas. It has a 90% fail rate, because the body makes stem cells against it. I can show you my research if you like. But you either believe it or you don't.
If you trust your medicine as though it can solve all problems, what happens when your doctor misdiagnoses you? Or gives you a medicine at an overdose? Yes, people do sometimes take drugs because they would like them to work, not because they do work.
But you've missed an important point here. This is an explanation of how people 5000 YEARS in the future are doing medicine. In Discworld, they used to think the world was round, but now know it's a disc on the back of four elephants riding on a turtle. The point being that an author can set up any rules to how science or medicine evolved that they like, and the reader is supposed to suspend their disbelief, even if it's hilarious.
What you want to believe outside of reading my book is up to you, but you've failed at reading the story, I'm afraid.
Because of trust. People like you trust the science, and keep taking medicine even if it makes you cough and gives you warts. Side effects? Who cares?!? "Modern" medicine has continued far longer than it should. I would have thought people would stop taking dangerous drugs long ago, but even a cursory glance at how doctors said thalidomide was "non-toxic" in 1958 despite awful birth defects, yeah that tells me that's not the case. Look up PFOA in your spare time.
I am on the schizo spectrum, yes. But more importantly, I'm worldbuilding. Which I can tell you've never done.
She was trying to leave, and someone was literally killing people who tried to leave without paying, and she gets moved back into line. That was the joke.
Sigh...
Said critic has no public profile, so I cannot chat with them to explain my writing choices. They also don't appear to have written anything. So I have someone who I can't talk to, what hasn't contributed anything meaningful, who wants to put down the way I write. How do I cope with them? I guess I like to publicly mock them. Yes, it's petty. I know.
...So what does everyone do to cope with poor reviews?
Last edited:
