Stronghammer has endeavored to improve himself through the written word and by all of you so quickly casting aside his bravery and effort you have discouraged him to the point where he probably won't write ever again never-mind improving the book he has no doubt worked very hard on.
First of all, you're selling him short. If he's got the guts to post his first effort at 20,000 pages with no proofreading and try to sell it on Amazon (something I could never do--I can hardly stand to post anything creative on the net), I trust that he's got the guts to deal with people saying "no, I don't like this." "You need to proofread so that I can better judge your work on its literary merits" is not a soul-breaking criticism, and as you can see he has taken it well...
as expected.
This man has the courage to delve into his imagination with all the creativity he can muster and come out the other side with a piece of literature. I think that is more than I could say for most of you. Why would you comment if only to say you don't like it? How does that help him or nurture his urge to write?
The reason why I criticize his writing is because I've spent thousands of hours both reading and writing it. Hell, I wrote a 60,000-word
outline for a novel in two weeks (about a year ago. The project went nowhere). I remember going home every day after middle school and writing 7+ hours a day, agonizing over every word, getting a friend to read it and criticize the everloving hell out of that thing. I ended up with 300 pages of unfinished novel, plus maybe 100-200 pages of cut material, that I never showed to anyone else. Because it was shit, and I knew it.
I want to encourage him to write. I also want to encourage him to proofread. If you don't fix all the errors you can find yourself, then you're going to exhaust your reader correcting surface errors when they could be getting into serious, artistic, structural stuff. You're not just wasting the reader's time. You're wasting your own time, and anticipation, and energy. This is a big deal, which is why I said something about it.
bravery ... courage ... delve into his imagination with all the creativity he can muster ... literature ... crushed him into the ground ... hatred cult ... torture
And again, as an occasional amateurish writer, I'm going to say that I don't think you know what any of these words mean.
If I thought this were all he were capable of, then maybe I'd say "yeah, it's very nice" or just leave him alone. But the idea is semi-interesting, and he clearly has ambition. But because I think he has more to offer, I can't just assume he's delving into his imagination with all the creativity he can muster. I have to assume that there's more, and he just hasn't figured out how to bring it out yet. I can't assume that he'll be crushed into the ground, because I have to assume that he's strong enough to take it.
To write is to sail into the wind with neither charts nor sextant, and pray that whatever you find on your voyage is interesting. It's rough. It's stormy. It's heartbreaking. It's insufflation. It's an exercise in vulnerability, from start to finish, as you invite the reader to partake of yourself and hope for immortality on the page.
So no, I'm not going to hand him an anchor. I'm going to tell him that the first thing he needs is an airtight sail, and then he can worry about where he's steering his ship.