# Giving critique?



## Falunel (Mar 9, 2011)

I've always wanted to help out other writers by giving critique, but no matter how many times I try, my mind freezes up whenever I think of something to say that isn't grammatical. I'm good with copyediting, but it's not feasible to go through and point out every single grammar mistake, and I've learned the hard way that some people don't appreciate it. Other times, I'll see things that could be worded more effectively, but I can't just figure out how to explain _why_ it should be reworded. >.>

So, anyone else have the same difficulties? Is there any advice that could be given regarding critiquing? Post it here. ^^


----------



## At Dusk I Reign (Mar 9, 2011)

Falunel said:


> So, anyone else have the same difficulties? Is there any advice that could be given regarding critiquing? Post it here. ^^


I generally avoid critiquing anyone else's work, primarily because I'm not so sure of my own abilities that I feel confident to dish out advice. Opinions I'm happy to spread far and wide, but actual advice is more precious and I'm rather lacking in that regard. Were I to assume the mantle of some authors and presume myself omnipotent I might give it a try, but life has taught me that very few humans are ever worth listening to. I tend to just muddle through on my own, taking on board what other people have said but ignoring it if it doesn't work for me. Not the the ideal solution, but near enough to perfection.


----------



## Donny Bruso (Mar 9, 2011)

I tend to not critique grammar when I read someone else's work, unless is it something I am 100% written in stone sure of. Spelling I will do, word substitutions, and general flow of sentences, but I tend to stay away from punctuation because it's such a headache and more detail than they are likely to want. They are mostly interested in my opinion of their story. Unless their punctuation is so bad, such as commas every other word, that it interferes with my reading, I leave it alone. 

I look more at characters, do they perform to the standards that the author has set for them? Are there huge, gaping plot holes I could drive a herd of elephants through(Note to self, purchase new 'deluxe model' elephants for plot hole testing)? How is their general spelling and grammar? Is it good enough that it doesn't pull me out of the story? Is the story good enough to suck me in and I forget to read with my editorial eye? (I have that problem critiquing Meg's work)

Grammar can be fine tuned later, once the story is polished up, so I focus on that. And of course I always give constructive criticism. No matter how bad the writing and story are, if you can't find anything to compliment the author on, don't send them a review. We authors are vain and protective of our children, and we want to hear how wonderful and intelligent they are; even if they are sitting on the floor in their own filth, cross-eyed and chewing on their own foot.


----------



## Ophiucha (Mar 9, 2011)

I tell people before they hand me their papers, "do you see this white? you won't when you get this back." I know I can't be general, and honestly I am going to be very blunt and will point out every misplaced comma and awkward sentence. I am the sort of person who keeps notes for my critiques to ensure continuity, and I have no qualms about being brutal if it comes down to it. A lot of people don't ask me to read their works because of that, but some people practically rely on it.

Anyway, as for _how_ I critique: red pens and post-it notes. I buy post-it notes in bulk, and I go through them fast if I'm reading over a full manuscript. I use those to give suggestions on rewording a sentence, and the red pens for things that are just inaccurate. I'll use the page margins for smaller issues, ones that don't need a full sentence or two's response. If I am editing something online, I tend to use a lot striked out text (in red next to it, the correct usage) and I use green text in parentheses to give commentary and suggestions). On average, if you give me a 100 page document to read, the commentary alone will push it into the 160 page territory.

Obviously, if it is just something wrong, I give the correct usage beside it and move on. Unless it is something nitpicky. Alright vs. all right or something like that. I tend to include a note about it, say why I think you'd be better off using my suggestion, then leave it to the author. My comments and suggestions are often similar, although they may include full rewrites, suggested word changes, etc. For instance, if you submit these sentences: "She started walking, book bag in hand, thinking about him. I have many other guy friends, she thought hopelessly." I will include the following: "The first sentence is grammatically awkward. The two commas act as a comma slice, and the sentence reads like "She started walking thinking about him," and should include a word to separate those verbs. Consider 'while'. The thought does not stand out from the text, and should be italicized or written in small quotes, such as 'these'."

Of course, I also include story and character notes as well (I will critique worldbuilding consistency, character development - anything and everything, really), and the occasional "lol" or "radical!" on the margins, if something is worth the minor praise. Those tend to warrant separate asides entirely, though. I often write an "end note" (about 10 pages) of more general "over the story, I was always confused about X" or "character Y's side story was never resolved") and such.


----------



## Mdnight Falling (Mar 9, 2011)

Oh yeah.. Though I'm far from scared to voice my opinion on things.. I'm always told I'm "too honest" and tend to hurt people's feelings.. I'd rather the truth be known than them find out later and it hurt worse... LOL... And this motto applies to playing the role of critic too... If you ask me to look over what you've written.. I will point out every mistake you made, every point that could be made better... Things that aren't needed.. I expect the same from those I ask to go over my work.. I've I show you something... That means I trust you enough to point out my flaws. After all it's better a friend see it and correct it then you bomb because your readers think you can't spell.. No?


----------



## Ophiucha (Mar 9, 2011)

Yeah, that is my train of thought. But there are many people who get that sort of critique back and say you are being too mean and that it's just a few extra commas and a couple of misspelled words or whatever the problem was. :/ It's like, do you want me to tell you what you can improve on, or do you want me to tell you that you're the next J.K. Rowling?


----------



## Mdnight Falling (Mar 9, 2011)

Ophiucha said:


> Yeah, that is my train of thought. But there are many people who get that sort of critique back and say you are being too mean and that it's just a few extra commas and a couple of misspelled words or whatever the problem was. :/ It's like, do you want me to tell you what you can improve on, or do you want me to tell you that you're the next J.K. Rowling?


 
LOL!!!! exactly!!!! I have taken harsh criticism from people over the years and have smiled and nodded and said thank you LOL but let me turn around and say nicely "There should be a comma here" or "This really should be a new paragraph" and suddenly I find myself being yelled at o.o


----------



## Mdnight Rising (Mar 9, 2011)

I would rather get peoples opinions on things i write then nothign at all even if they are harsh  or even considered bad...... at least then i have a general idea on what to work on


----------



## Philip Overby (Mar 9, 2011)

I don't think grammar, punctuation, and all that should be what anyone critiques if they're reading a story for someone.  You should look at the content or how you felt about the story.  If the story is littered with bad spelling and grammar then, yeah, mention it.  If you can't read it because of that fact, then that is a whole separate issue.

I always look at content.  I don't feel like giving grammar lessons.  That's my day job...

I recently critiqued my friend's sister's story she wanted me to read.  I read it carefully and gave her some honest feedback about it.  She even told me, "Give me honest feedback."  I spent over an hour writing out my detailed thoughts about her story and she never wrote me back to say "Thanks" or "Whatever" or anything.  That annoyed me.

I also traded stories with another woman once and gave her some good feedback (that she liked) and she never responded to the story I sent her.  It was a one-sided deal.  That also really annoyed me.

If someone wants real, honest, detailed criticism from me, I'll give it to them.  But if they cry and say I'm a big meanie, then they have no business writing anyway.


----------



## Ophiucha (Mar 9, 2011)

I tend to weigh the grammar and story criticism out by which has more problems. If their grammar and spelling is relatively decent, save for some stylistic oddities, I'll probably only point it out once and otherwise never mention it unless something is just an obvious typo worth a good "lol" in the margin. If their grammar and spelling is atrocious, I'll focus more heavily on it. As it is, most people's grammar and spelling is atrocious. To be equally fair, though, if there story is a clichÃ© ridden mess, then I'll focus far more heavily on that then misplaced commas. Some might call that 'accentuating the negative', but I call it necessary.


----------



## Mdnight Falling (Mar 9, 2011)

Phil the Drill said:


> I don't think grammar, punctuation, and all that should be what anyone critiques if they're reading a story for someone.  You should look at the content or how you felt about the story.  If the story is littered with bad spelling and grammar then, yeah, mention it.  If you can't read it because of that fact, then that is a whole separate issue.
> 
> I always look at content.  I don't feel like giving grammar lessons.  That's my day job...



I do the whole deal. I suffer from mild ocd LOL I must correct anything I see wrong and most of the time that would be spelling. Punctuation I'm not so good at but I can be a walking dictionary if I have to be LOL. I of course look at content too after all why READ if you aren't going to pay attention to what it is you're reading  I'll gladly tell you if I think what you've shown me if something I'd go out and read on my own or not...


----------



## Ravana (Mar 10, 2011)

Advice? Yeah: be honest. Otherwise, you're being useless. And be specific; otherwise, ditto.

I'd like to make a distinction that appears to be getting overlooked by some. Making corrections to grammar and punctuation is _not_ "critiquing"; it's copyediting. That doesn't mean you shouldn't comment on it, particularly if the errors hinder the story–and I've seen plenty of cases where the grammar was so confused I couldn't tell what the author intended me to understand. You should not, however, get hung up on it, when asked for "feedback"; it shouldn't even be your primary focus. Note it in passing and move on. If the author wants you to focus on this, he can always ask. (Or pay someone. My rates are good.…)

My preferred method of offering input is Socratic: I pose questions, to call attention to areas I think require it and to suggest alternatives or opportunities for the author to expand upon. If I flat-out think something doesn't work, I'll say as much; if I think something _does_ work, I'll say that too–and telling a writer what you think he's doing right is at least as important as telling him what you think he's doing wrong.

A few other points:
(1) As mentioned previously: *be specific* in your feedback. "This is great!" is every bit as uninformative as "This sucks!" Without reasons _why_, neither provides any guidance to the author.
(2) If the author doesn't agree with your input, don't get offended. It's his story.
(3) If you're an author, don't get offended when you ask for feedback and actually receive it. If all you're looking for is approval, go enroll yourself in day care. (In my experience, what I am when I ask for feedback and receive it is _surprised_–I couldn't believe how few people were willing to respond to my requests when I started making them.)
(4) Finally: you _should_ want feedback, positive _and_ negative. I mean, seriously–you don't want to hear whether someone thinks some part of your story needs improving, but you're planning on trying to _publish_ it? Or were you just writing it for yourself? If so, why were you asking for feedback? And if not… hello, author: meet audience. Might as well get their responses while they can still do you some good.

And, yes, I grade in red pen. I usually have to issue a warning prior to handing back the first paper of the term–that the ones with the most written on them are, generally, the _best_ papers, not the worst: they're the ones that have engaged my mind, made me want to strike up conversations with the authors. After all, it only takes me two letters to mark a sentence fragment; it takes a lot more space to compliment someone's insight–never mind complement it.


----------



## Mdnight Falling (Mar 10, 2011)

I like how you think Ravana.. Perhaps I'll ask you to look over the manuscript when I finally get it done. Since I've joined, you've been straight forward and to the point in every post you've made. Although dear god you can write LOL, you hardly ever make me angry or upset even when you're being your hardest in giving an opinion on something... I like ya more and more everyday >^.^<


----------



## Chilari (Mar 10, 2011)

I'm with Ravana on that, though it is a while since I have critiqued anything to be honest. I prefer to be honest, though am careful, on second read-through, to pick out things which are good to compliment because I know from having my own stuff critiqued that just getting "you need to change this" or "this doesn't work" without "this works well" etc is very disheartening. Even then I sometimes don't hear back from the author, which I just think is rude, but worse is when they post a response along the lines of telling me I'm wrong because "it's meant to be like that". About a year ago someone posted their first chapter on another forum I frequent, asking for honest feedback. So I have some. At one point a character screams, and it isn't clear why this is immediately, but then it emerges that the scream was because her child is dead. I suggested that "scream" doesn't really convey the emotions that one would feel in that situation, especially since there are other reasons a character might scream at that point, and suggested a few other words which might clear up the confusion. The author came back and basically blamed me for reading it wrong, not considering that he might be writing it wrong if it confuses me. So now I'm much more wary when I review stuff because people do act like you've gone out of your way to offend them when replying to feedback requests if they really only wanted ego stroking.


----------



## Ravana (Mar 10, 2011)

Mdnight Falling said:


> I like how you think Ravana.. Perhaps I'll ask you to look over the manuscript when I finally get it done. Since I've joined, you've been straight forward and to the point in every post you've made. Although dear god you can write LOL, you hardly ever make me angry or upset even when you're being your hardest in giving an opinion on something... I like ya more and more everyday >^.^<



Thank you very much. And, yeah, I do tend toward lengthy posts.  As I note under "bad habits," it comes from trying to say everything I think of at once. And, yes, I can certainly be opinionated–I _do_ try to avoid stepping on toes, or shutting people down, though it may not always seem like it–but I always avoid expressing strong opinions unless I can also express the reasons that underlie them. Perhaps that's why it "works," in not offending (you, at least: I hope I haven't offended anyone else): you can at least see _why_ I think something, even if you don't agree with me… and that can go a long way. 

Which is not off-topic: a critique will be that much more valuable, and that much less "confrontational," if you can back up what you're saying, with examples, alternatives, etc.

Chilari: right. You _may_ have "read something wrong"–but if it wasn't completely clear from the way it was written (and you'd simply overlooked something), then the author may not be conveying what he intended, or what he thought he said. This is one reason why outside review is vital: you always make the worst reader for your own work (for these purposes), because _you know what you meant to say_–and as a result may mentally fill in things that are not actually present in the text as you review it. The correct response for that author should have been to solicit additional reactions to see if anyone else had the same difficulty, and maybe, _maybe_ to say "I don't see it that way; here's why…" to see if it makes sense to you on a consequent reading. In general I don't encourage any response to a critique other than a "Thank you"–and, yes, not giving one is rude–though if you, the author, truly believe that what you have is what you want, it may be worth talking through, at least to the point where you understand why you and your reader differ; after that, you have to make your own decision as to what's best for your manuscript.


----------



## Falunel (Mar 10, 2011)

Thanks for your insight, guys. I suppose my main problem is that I'm not accustomed to reading with a critical eye when it comes to plot/character/purpose. Whenever I come across a plot hole in someone else's story, my mind either overlooks it, decides it will be explained later and forgets it, or comes up with an explanation on its own and moves on. Also, I tend to be overnervous when giving critique, especially to people I don't know. Experience with noobs who want their ego stoked has left a bad taste, and I've grown accustomed to beating around the bush instead of being direct.

I like the idea of the Socratic method. Just telling someone that there's something wrong with the plot feels vague when it comes to giving advice on actually fixing the problem, and telling someone how to fix it... well, it'd feel like writing the story for them. However, asking questions pushes them to think on their own about filling in the holes.
Also, I like Ophiucha's method of online edits. I'll have to keep that in mind next time someone asks me to copyedit.


----------



## Telcontar (Mar 10, 2011)

It is tough. I'm of the opinion that a serious writer needs to both know how to critique and how to receive critiques. 

The first thing to know, and remember, and keep in mind always is that our hobby (or job, if you are so lucky) is entirely subjective. Beyond the basic rules of the language you happen to be writing in, creative writing has no rules. Even those basic rules can be played with if you're good enough. Any criticism has to be taken with a mind to who it comes from.

Central to that same point is that the author needs to be able to be objective (insofar as it is possible) about their own work. You have to be able to step back and consider alternative views coldly. This is probably the hardest thing to do. For one because most people have a hard time being objective at the best of times. For two because, again, all writing is subjective. For three, because you wrote it because you LOVE IT.


----------



## Mdnight Falling (Mar 11, 2011)

Exactly.. which is why I've personally rewritten my own book at least 17 times in the last 23 years. I'm never happy with it when it's finished and since I've had no one else to read it, I've had no choice but to be my own critic.. and let me tell you... Once you get into the flow of it.. You'll never find a harsher critic then yourself >.<


----------



## Ophiucha (Mar 11, 2011)

I have no real interest in showing a work to others until it has passed under my own scrutinization (is that a word?), so I get that. Of course, not quite 23 years. I'm not even that old. I've rewritten my book seven times in the past three years, and it is nearly indistinguishable from the earliest draft. That said, aside from perfecting some details of style, I have settled on the details of story, character, theme, worldbuilding, etc., so now it's just a matter of getting a good draft, editing heavily, and getting a few friends (who I know will tell me if something blows) to read it. I'm anticipating having it "done" by this time next year, and then arguing over another few drafts with publishers and whatnot. 

I will admit, though, for as harsh a critic as I can be, there are some people I have difficulty being as brutal as I tend to be towards. My husband and my best friend, namely. As it is, my husband won't show me his works until he's done some thorough editing himself, but my best friend? Yeah... she's not a bad writer, but she's got a few years to go. I tend to just distance myself from her while I'm editing and critiquing a piece of hers, otherwise I'd have a bit of trouble addressing the issues nicely.


----------



## Mdnight Falling (Mar 11, 2011)

LMAO! I'm 30 I've been writing the same story since I was roughy 7 so yeah 23 years x.x and every time I get near completed with it I decide to look it over and it ends up in the trash.. that's what happens when none ofy our friends or family reads or is interested in fantasy stuff they won't touch it LOL So I've had to do it all myself.. Now hopefully Bry will look over my stuff.. when I ever find a converter -.- and will tell me if it's publishable or not LOL


----------



## Ravana (Mar 12, 2011)

Ophiucha said:


> until it has passed under my own scrutinization (is that a word?)



Since you asked: "scrutiny." (And you will all note, please, that I never correct anyone who _doesn't_ ask.)



> I will admit, though, for as harsh a critic as I can be, there are some people I have difficulty being as brutal as I tend to be towards. My husband and my best friend, namely. As it is, my husband won't show me his works until he's done some thorough editing himself, but my best friend? Yeah... she's not a bad writer, but she's got a few years to go. I tend to just distance myself from her while I'm editing and critiquing a piece of hers, otherwise I'd have a bit of trouble addressing the issues nicely.



I show people my stuff when I'm ready for input, whatever that stage is… usually not until I've gone over it repeatedly, but it depends on what I'm looking for. Often I'll show a partially-finished work to someone when I feel stuck, or when I know something's missing or awkward but can't tell what. I don't think I've ever used a suggestion that was given me in such a circumstance–but the feedback invariably sparks something that I _do_ use. (My usual "that's not how I'd do it" reaction again… at which point I realize how I _would_ do it.)

As for "being brutal": hey, you're a writer, right? Should be able to come up with creative ways to present things.… 

Try the question approach, at least for anything that isn't outright correction. "Why does X do this here?" "Did I miss where you mentioned Y earlier?" "Would Z happen because of this?" Et cetera. Lets the other person feel smart because she knows something about her story that you don't (even if she didn't before you asked!), or lets her figure out the answer herself.


----------



## j-max04 (May 28, 2015)

I normally think about what I would do differently and why, and if I can't think of a definitive why, then I normally won't say the what. I also have to consider whether the advice is my subjective opinion or something that could potentially help them in their writing.


----------



## Russ (May 28, 2015)

Critiquing can be super valuable when done well, but can be tricky to do well.  There are some great suggestions above and to them I would add the following:

1) Consider the person who are critiquing for and the stage their writing is at.  Give them suggestions and critiques that will help them  NOW.  When I am critiquing a multi-published successful author and I see a couple of comas out of place I don't waste everybody'e time on that I move on to deeper or bigger stuff.  On the other hand if the grammar or language is so bad that you can't get near the story don't talk to them about character arc and motivation.  I think of critiquing like teaching or coaching, you can overload somebody with your response, you can over coach.  Give them two or three points that they can improve on and leave the rest for later.

2)  Do try to offer solutions when you spot a problem not just point out the problem.

3)  You don't have to be particularly experienced to do a good critique.  You are a potential reader and that counts for something, just be honest, work hard at it, and don't engage if the writer just seems to want to argue about your comments.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 28, 2015)

Ravana said:


> Advice? Yeah: be honest. Otherwise, you're being useless. And be specific; otherwise, ditto.


That's how I feel. 

I am detailed when I do a critique, & I treat everyone the same, regardless of skill level. However, I do ask people to tell me what they're looking for in a critique. I will try to tailor my critique to suit their needs. 

Most often though, people want the full gambit. In that case, I try to pose questions about their writing so they can come to see an aspect of their submission from a different angle. 

One thing I won't do is offer suggestions on how something should be written, or at least, I rarely do. The writer gets more out of it if they agree with a raised issue and figure out how to rework it on their own. I never want to try and teach my style. I'd rather them work on theirs.

I try to balance the harshness of critical review by drawing out the good in their writing too. Further, I make sure the writer understands my intention is to help. That is why my crits are so detailed. If I didn't care, I wouldn't put 4 hours of work into a 5k submission. 

I'm part of several partnerships online and two live critique groups. That means I'm doing about five critiques a week. At this point, I've probably done several hundred crits. As a result I'm blunt, but caring. I don't have time to coddle anyone because they have a thin skin. If they aren't ready to approach their work like a professional, with a certain emotional detachment, then I'm not a good partner for them. Everyone I work with knows this up front. They all get the disclaimer. 

The main reason for my blunt and direct honesty is two-fold. As Ravana stated above, anything less than total honesty has limited value. Secondly, I demand the same brutal honesty in return. I have zero use for anything less.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 28, 2015)

> The main reason for my blunt and direct honesty is two-fold. As Ravana stated above, anything less than total honesty has limited value. Secondly, I demand the same brutal honesty in return. I have zero use for anything less.



First, a note: The OP is from 2011.  Not sure why it was resurrected...  That being said, it's always fun to critique critiquing.

I agree with you, T.Allen, but I'd add a third fold:

If a writer's skin is too thin to accept an honest critique, I don't want to waste any more of my time.  I'd prefer to learn that as quickly as possible, so I can move on to someone who might gain more use from my comments.


----------



## Caged Maiden (May 28, 2015)

yeah...I was like, "I've never seen this thread...who is that who posted it?  I don't recognize the name...Oooooh...resurrection."

Critique is something we haven't talked about in a while, though.


----------



## Terry Greer (May 29, 2015)

Proper critique is rare - I'd love to link up with a couple of others for specific in depth critique - but I've found people are generally too sensitive (both about giving opinion and receiving it).

At a company i was with a few years back we used to do a monthly critique of each others work - there were only about 5 or so in the group and eventually we got comfortable with each other to start giving genuine feedback - took a while though until we knew each other well enough for our natural biases to be known and accepted.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 29, 2015)

Terry Greer said:


> ...eventually we got comfortable with each other to start giving genuine feedback - took a while though until we knew each other well enough for our natural biases to be known and accepted.


Critique partners are made, not born. It's the same as any other relationship. The more time you spend together, the more you understand the other's vision, goals, and style. 

Asking questions up front, concerning what an author hopes to gain from a critique helps, but nothing replaces good old time spent working with another writer.


----------



## Mythopoet (May 29, 2015)

Critique is just about the most highly overrated thing in fiction writing these days. I'm going to go against the flow here (shock!) and say that I feel very strongly that almost all critique is very, very bad for fiction writers. But _especially_ critique from other writers. Writing stories is NOT something that should be done by committee, which is the ultimate result of having your work "critiqued" by other writers or "professionals" in the writing industry.

What a writer should do is have a first reader or two or three who are just average readers go over the work and not, absolutely NOT EVER, look for things that are wrong, but tell the writer in general whether they think the story worked, whether it was something they enjoyed reading, whether they would have put it down if they were reading it casually and if so where, etc. The first readers can point out areas they felt were problems but they should not at any point make suggestions as to how the work should be improved, it's the writer's job to figure out if the story needs to be improved and if so how. 

Above all a writer should have a strong personal vision for the work that they do not compromise based on "critique", which is all too often what happens. The job of the first readers is simply to help the writer determine whether or not the actual written pages succeeded in conveying that vision through the narrative. Only people who can read like readers, and most writers (particularly aspiring and/or inexperienced writers) can't do that, can help with that goal.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 29, 2015)

Mythopoet,

When I first started trying to write, I knew almost nothing.  Critique helped me greatly in that it took me from nothing to something.  Sometimes, it took me in the wrong direction, and I had to backtrack.  I do not regret any of those missteps, however, because I learned from each.

For me personally, I would be no where near where I am today without critique. In my view, the fastest, easiest, least-expensive, most-efficient way to learn craft is to write something, polish it to the best of your ability, and then have other writers tear it to pieces.

Once you have learned craft and developed your own style, those kinds of critiques become pretty much worthless.

The same thing, however, goes for story.  Until you learn how to tell stories, other authors telling you what you did wrong is tremendously valuable.

Granted, you have to evaluate each comment for validity.  Some will be wrong.  Others may be spot on.  Others may contain a kernel of truth that will lead you to the right path.

Maybe you're at a place where you know what you're doing.  If so, I think there's a great deal of validity to your points.

For me, I'm still learning and find it helpful to get all the advice that I can.


----------



## Russ (May 29, 2015)

If it turns out that you have written your novel by committee because you have engaged in the critiquing process than you have used it in the wrong way.  You can't blame the process for that.

I will have a chance most years to have good long talks about writing with around 20 very successful authors.  I would estimate 18 of them would tell me critiquing was quite important to their success, and about half of them still us that process or something very similar to it.


----------



## Mythopoet (May 29, 2015)

Russ said:


> If it turns out that you have written your novel by committee because you have engaged in the critiquing process than you have used it in the wrong way.  You can't blame the process for that.



I disagree. By definition, if you are accepting others' critique of your work and your work is altered by it, you are accepting another person's tastes, point of view and opinions into your work. This is the death of real creativity. The very nature of the activity of revising a story based on critique is, in my opinion, destructive to the creative act of storytelling.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 29, 2015)

Mythopoet said:


> I disagree. By definition, if you are accepting others' critique of your work and your work is altered by it, you are accepting another person's tastes, point of view and opinions into your work. This is the death of real creativity. The very nature of the activity of revising a story based on critique is, in my opinion, destructive to the creative act of storytelling.



I find that the words I use to translate my story don't always function in the way that I intended.  Critiquing is how I learn things like, "Hey, your character came across as a complete jerk in that scene."

If I meant for the character to come across as a complete jerk, that's fantastic.  Often, however, that wasn't what I intended at all.  So I change my words to more accurately reflect my intention.

I'm not sure, then, how revising my story is destruction to the creative act of storytelling when it helps me get my story across in the way that I intended?


----------



## Mythopoet (May 29, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> I find that the words I use to translate my story don't always function in the way that I intended.  Critiquing is how I learn things like, "Hey, your character came across as a complete jerk in that scene."
> 
> If I meant for the character to come across as a complete jerk, that's fantastic.  Often, however, that wasn't what I intended at all.  So I change my words to more accurately reflect my intention.
> 
> I'm not sure, then, how revising my story is destruction to the creative act of storytelling when it helps me get my story across in the way that I intended?



That's not what critique, especially critique from other writers does. See my first comment on the previous page.


----------



## BWFoster78 (May 29, 2015)

Mythopoet said:


> That's not what critique, especially critique from other writers does. See my first comment on the previous page.



Maybe the comment is in the form of, "I hated the character here.  You should have him do this instead."

I would interpret that as, "Hey, the character is a jerk in this scene."  Is that what I intended?

I have free will and enough perspective to decide if I take the suggestion or not.

In essence, though, critiquing tells me a lot about how my words are interpreted and I think it is highly valuable.

Of course, most of your objection is based on your perspective that the writer is creating art that should not be tainted by anyone else.  I can't speak for anyone else, but I couldn't care less about creating art.  I just want to write something that my readers will find entertaining.  Whatever gets me closer to that goal is a good thing.  Critiquing gets me closer to that goal.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 29, 2015)

Mythopoet said:


> Writing stories is NOT something that should be done by committee, which is the ultimate result of having your work "critiqued" by other writers or "professionals" in the writing industry.



I'll echo Russ here. If this is how you're approaching critique, then yes, it'd be a bad thing. However, it's bad because you're doing it wrong.   

Critique has been invaluable to me in finding clarity & plausibility issues in my writing that I'd never have found on my own. Clarity issues hide themselves from the author because they know what was intended by a scene. The reader, however, has only the words on the page. Being able to identify clarity issues is my #1 ask when I take my work to critique partners. 

Secondly, when considering plausibility, the writers I work with have pointed out issues I never considered before, issues that now seem obvious, but lay buried behind my ignorance on a topic, or a lack of thoughtfulness on my part. Without other eyes drawing my attention to plausibility concerns, I likely wouldn't have discovered those problems. Now though, I can consider those issues and decide what to do about them.  

Another great value to me is learning what a reader expects at certain points along the way. That is helpful in telling me if my foreshadowing and red herrings are having the desired effect. Again, this is something impossible for me to know because I have full knowledge of future events, character back story, & character motivations.   

There are types of critique I just won't pay attention to. Typically, those come from other writers who suggest how to write something. No. Just, no. I don't need style advice, at this point. I know how to write. I don't need to hear how someone else would write my story. That being said, I do want to know when & why my writing is jarring for the reader. Is there something about my prose that pulls you from immersion, or makes you notice the writing? Since I wish for my writing to be transparent, this is important information for me as an author.   

As Brian said, you have to understand what to absorb as useful & what to ignore. I'm part of two live critique groups. Live groups differ from my online partnerships. Online partners are people I've selected to share work with. As such, they are writers whose opinions I respect. Each side wants the other to succeed, and that desire is obvious. They've grown, over time, to understand my vision & how they can help me get there.   

The live groups are a different sort of animal. There are always 2 or 3 people (out of 5-6) I consider valuable partners. They alone make the exercise valuable. However, experience levels and personalities vary greatly. There are nit-pickers who offer little true insight. There are those who seem to offer only the negative. They never like anything (red flag). There are those who only offer praise (the worst of all critique sins, in my opinion). There are those that think they are good writers, yet their submissions show that they don't even grasp accepted grammar or the basic fundamentals of fiction writing. And, some think their lack of experience means they have little to offer, which is untrue. At the very least, everyone should be able to say what they liked or didn't like.  

It's your job as the writer to clearly state what you need from your partners. It's your job to decide what advice is good and will improve the story, and what is should be ignored. If you can't differentiate, then yes, critique is going to be a bad thing. If you can, and with confidence, separate  the wheat from the chaff, then I fail to see how critique isn't a benefit.


----------



## Mythopoet (May 29, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> I can't speak for anyone else, but I couldn't care less about creating art.  I just want to write something that my readers will find entertaining.  Whatever gets me closer to that goal is a good thing.



Art is just something that a human being creates to share with other human beings. It's not exclusive from entertainment. I'm not talking about being an _artiste_ or some sort of literary snob. Actually, it seems like most "literary" writers these days don't believe they can do anything without a full editorial team. I'm the total opposite of that. I believe that writers need to trust their personal vision and their own skills and tastes and not alter those things to suit other people. This is what critique leads to. Writers who can't do anything for themselves.


----------



## SeverinR (May 29, 2015)

I haven't used showcase much, since coming to Mythic scribes.
I just used it recently. The critique was good, it showed weak areas, and people gave suggestions on how to improve.

If I had switched to what other people had offered, it would no longer be my work. But I did look at what they said, and made good changes to improve the sentence. (First sentence)
The changes I made were at least a paragraph long and inspired good writing from the suggestions.

I needed the critique to get me back writing. I had stopped writing for quite a while.

Critique should not be a cover up, but like editing, should be a polishing of the piece.  Alter words or phrases even whole perspectives to show a better story.  To make the story flow better, to add interest to the piece.

The best critique I ever got was a friend that I asked to proof read a chapter, said: "I loved the female character(she couldn't pronounce her name), she was so bubbly, talkative and happy." The exact way I wanted her to be seen. (She was also a little nervous at meeting new people, which also added to her talkativeness.)

Accepting critique and using it the right way is important part of writing. Most people can't write the perfect story, because we know what we meant to say or show, but what really comes out might not even be close.  Maybe even totally opposite.  

Critiquing and editing, both buff out the rough areas. Critiquing just uses more then one persons view to do so.

Myself, I want to create art and have something people want to read.  IMHO if I write a story that is hailed as great art, but only a few people read, I have failed. But if I write junk that people read and throw away, then again I failed.
I want to entertain and have it viewed as art. The great balancing act.


----------



## Philip Overby (May 29, 2015)

> This is what critique leads to. Writers who can't do anything for themselves.



I'm just throwing this out there, but I'd wager most writers that use critiques tend to gain more confidence in their writing, either by discarding advice that doesn't work for them or by finding that what they're doing is working in some capacity. Perhaps just having beta readers would work better if you want to skip the critiquing phase. Then you're just allowing people's natural reactions without worrying about nit-picking or stylistic reconstruction. Everyone makes mistakes when critiquing sometimes (I know I have). However, I think writing in a vacuum without any input might cause some of the same problems that over-critiquing might. Meaning the vision might be distorted by one person's feelings (the writer's) or by too many people's feelings (the partners'). I ultimately know what I feel comfortable with as a writer, but sometimes people pointing certain things out to me can help me realize things I'm doing over and over so I can either a) keep doing them because I like them or b) stop doing them because they're not working.


----------



## Russ (May 29, 2015)

Mythopoet said:


> I disagree. By definition, if you are accepting others' critique of your work and your work is altered by it, you are accepting another person's tastes, point of view and opinions into your work. This is the death of real creativity. The very nature of the activity of revising a story based on critique is, in my opinion, destructive to the creative act of storytelling.



The underlying assumption, that the creative ability of the author is perfect or sublime and cannot benefit or be enhanced by being critiqued by others, is simply a flawed one.

This is the height of what I like to call "self-referential".


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jun 1, 2015)

> I believe that writers need to trust their personal vision and their own skills and tastes and not alter those things to suit other people. This is what critique leads to. Writers who can't do anything for themselves.



Mythopoet,

I'm really trying to wrap my head around exactly what you believe.

Let's say you said the following:

"Brian, I read your novel, and it sucked.  Adding zombies, however, would make it totally awesome!"

Let's say my reaction was, "You really need to lay off the crack, but, since you made the suggestion, I'll add zombies to my book even though I think it's a horrible idea."

I think most of us would agree that this is a bad idea.  All changes to the story should be made with thoughtful deliberation, not just on a whim because someone told you to.

So what if I reacted this way, instead:

"Zombies! Totes fabu! That'd make my novel the awesome."

As far as I can tell from your posts, you'd consider me making the change a bad thing.  But, if the change did make my story better, how is making my story better a bad thing?

What if we never had the original conversation and I came up with the idea of adding zombies on my own? Would that be bad because it's a change from my original concept or would it be okay as a part of my creative process?  But, if that's the case, I just don't understand how the same result can be good one way and bad another...


----------



## Vilya (Jun 1, 2015)

Mythopoet said:


> Critique is just about the most highly overrated thing in fiction writing these days. I'm going to go against the flow here (shock!) and say that I feel very strongly that almost all critique is very, very bad for fiction writers. But _especially_ critique from other writers. Writing stories is NOT something that should be done by committee, which is the ultimate result of having your work "critiqued" by other writers or "professionals" in the writing industry.
> 
> Above all a writer should have a strong personal vision for the work that they do not compromise based on "critique", which is all too often what happens. The job of the first readers is simply to help the writer determine whether or not the actual written pages succeeded in conveying that vision through the narrative. Only people who can read like readers, and most writers (particularly aspiring and/or inexperienced writers) can't do that, can help with that goal.



I have to beg to differ on this point, because this is exactly how we approach things in my writing group.  We go through and tell each other where we were bored, confused, or point out the things we didn't believe.  We also give our thoughts that we had while reading ( a kind of stream of consciousness).  All five of us are writers.  We don't critique grammar, don't cross out other people's sentences and rewrite them, and we don't give unsolicited advice (of course an author is free to ask, but most of the time they just figure things out by themselves).  I probably should note that we deal with mostly lightly edited first or second drafts, so the grammar critique that may be useful for later drafts isn't so useful at this stage in the editing process.

I have found it incredibly helpful to find out how well things translate from my head to the page.  I know that you mentioned something similar, but I do not think it is impossible to get that kind of critique out of other writers.  Most writers I know are some of the most well read, careful readers around.


----------



## Russ (Jun 1, 2015)

Although I disagree with MP on this issue I was reading a book on writing by a writer I respect greatly this weekend, and he said something along the lines of:

"Writer's critiquing is the only  place you will find the work of a non-expert, being critiqued by a group of other non-experts in the hope of turning the first person into an expert."

To which I would reply, critiquing by non-experts is to make the work as good as non-experts can make it, in the hope that experts will then take it the rest of the way.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Jun 1, 2015)

Hands down, critique has been the single best learning method in my writing journey.  I've learned from the many wonderful people who donated their time and read my rough work, spending hours combing through weak descriptions, poorly-structured paragraphs, and meandering ideas I never fully formed or allowed to wander off subject and plot point.  Without those folks, I'd have never been able to look at my work through the eyes of others, and I never would have fully understood readers' needs and wants from my characters and the scenes in which plots unfold.

On the flip side, without having performed hundreds of critiques myself, I'd have remained on my earlier path, continuing to write those things I mentioned above (and occasionally I still do), but since I've read so many rough drafts, I've been conditioned to pick out weak narrative, meandering history lessons, trite dialogue, etc.  When I read it, it jars me, and now I can see it all very clearly in my own rough drafts.  

I reckon without critique (and I've spent hundreds of hours back and forth, and sometimes with the same people for years, trading all kinds of work), I wouldn't have had the exposure to rough work and the hands-on process I'd have if I'd only been reading polished, published/ publishable work all that time.

Critique is the best tool in my arsenal, I use it every day, and I use it to great effect.  I'm not always the easiest crit partner, but I have deep respect for the folks who ask me to read for them, and the majority of those persons have expressed their gratitude I've spent my time for them, too.  I genuinely appreciate every one of my crit partners and I call them my friends, and I owe them a whole lot.  Without them, I wouldn't be as good as I am today, and I only hope they would say the same about having me on their team as well.  I think writers helping each other is the best thing ever.  We all win.


----------



## Devor (Jun 1, 2015)

I'm all for critiques.  But it's worth noting that a bad critique can really hurt.  People can get you to waste time running down all the wrong things, push you into a style that you're not comfortable with, fight the fun out of your story, and give you a false sense of quality when you've fixed their often shallow comments.

You've got to be careful out there!


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jun 1, 2015)

Devor said:


> I'm all for critiques.  But it's worth noting that a bad critique can really hurt.  People can get you to waste time running down all the wrong things, push you into a style that you're not comfortable with, fight the fun out of your story, and give you a false sense of quality when you've fixed their often shallow comments.
> 
> You've got to be careful out there!



I think that, as a beginner, I got pushed down a lot of false paths.

The thing is that, as a writer, I'm a result of everything I learned while doing so.  How can you really figure out who you are until you've tried some stuff?

Now that I'm not as much of a newbie, it's a lot harder to lead me down any path unless I'm willing.


----------

