How do you deal with criticism?

[Chessie]

I was inspired to post this question after a piece of mine was critiqued last night in comparison to GOT...which I thought was ridiculous. My writing could never compare to someone as experienced as George RR Martin! Which got me to thinking: as an aspiring published author, I would say I'm still sensitive to the comments of others when it comes to my work. I pour my heart and soul into my stories, yet always remembering to put the reader's needs first (while honoring the characters, etc). I love to write and it pleases me greatly to have others read my stuff.

But, I'm such a baby when it comes to criticism. I want this to change. I'm starting a new writing group in a few weeks and although I appreciate the suggestions of others (which have been helpful even at their most brutal moments), I still want thick skin because I know that its even tougher out there in the big bad world of publishing.

How do you folks do it? What's your trick to taking the crits of others...not so much to heart?

 

[Steerpike]

I don't know that there's a trick to it. I want criticism. The negative feedback will do you a lot more good in the long run than the positive feedback. You have to be able to separate reasonable criticism from useless criticism, but that's true whether someone is being overly negative or not. When you get criticism, take what you can use and leave the rest, and don't interpret the criticism as being some kind of statement about you personally.

Also, if you're an aspiring published author, then holding up comparisons to Game of Thrones is not out of bounds. That's your competition. You're better off holding yourself and your work to the highest standard you can think of that discounting your own work as being unable of reaching those heights. If you don't have faith in yourself in comparison to the likes of GRRM, why should an potential reader who is trying to decide what book to buy have faith in you?

One thing that I think is good with respect to criticism is to refuse to let yourself argue with it. Whether you agree with a critique or not, whether you think it is too hard or too soft, just say thank you and go on your way. Take what you can from the critique, and if that's nothing, then so be it. One of the worst things you can do is get into debates with a critiquer over their critique of your work. So if you're ever tempted to go that route, avoid it

 

[Chessie]

Also, if you're an aspiring published author, then holding up comparisons to Game of Thrones is not out of bounds. That's your competition. You're better off holding yourself and your work to the highest standard you can think of that discounting your own work as being unable of reaching those heights. If you don't have faith in yourself in comparison to the likes of GRRM, why should an potential reader who is trying to decide what book to buy have faith in you?

I didn't even think of it that way, thank you! Very clarifying. I do like crits, I want them, yes. Your post is very helpful, Steerpike, thank you for reminding me that really, its up to us what we choose to take from anything anyone says. I have this nasty habit of getting butthurt at the harshest comments...but then I turn around and put some to good use.

 

[Steerpike]

I didn't even think of it that way, thank you! Very clarifying. I do like crits, I want them, yes. Your post is very helpful, Steerpike, thank you for reminding me that really, its up to us what we choose to take from anything anyone says. I have this nasty habit of getting butthurt at the harshest comments...but then I turn around and put some to good use.

I think that happens to everyone, at least early on. I know when I started writing I was reluctant to show people my writing, because it bothered me to get criticism. Now, it just doesn't bother me anymore. It took time, but now whether someone loves m y work or rips it to shreds, I'm fine with it. Hopefully, they'll thrown in some useful observations in the process. If not, I still thank them and disregard everything they've said

 

[AnnaBlixt]

Hey, don't worry about being compared to GRRM. ;-)
While he does have a lot of brilliance, his last two volumes in ASOIAF sucked balls, to put it bluntly. He got a lot of bad critique for book 4, but did he learn from it before publishing book 5? Noooooo... and he would have been a better writer if he had.

For pity's sake, man, stop adding new perspectives, stop dillying around with storylines that lead nowhere, stop having your characters go around contemplating the texture of their pubic hair, and get on with the fricking story!

No one is above critique. A good writer learns from his, and if you take the critique that others give you and learn from it, you will be a better writer than Martin.

 

[Sheilawisz]

Accepting that you have to face criticism is a realistic part of being a Writer.

The positive feedback feels great, and even though the negative criticism can hurt, it's necessary so we can learn how to improve our craft and be better writers in the future. We have to keep cool heads and cold hearts as writers, so my best advice in case that you find trouble with this, is that you have to toughen up.

Also, remember that some readers might give you negative feedback simply because they don't like or understand the type of stories that you are writing. My sister loves reading my Fantasy stories, but my parents have read virtually nothing of my stuff and they would say it's bad anyway, just because they are not Fantasy people.

I also pour my heart and my soul into my stories, so I know how you feel =)

 

[Butterfly]

I had this same comment over at YWO several months ago. I haven't been there since I started redrafting. Now I'm close to the end, I might put up the next drafted opening shortly. What this person said... 'It reads too much like a Game of thrones...'

And I'm like... no it doesn't. It's nothing like GOT.

I put it down to two things...

1. The way I've set it out is one POV per chapter, and a different POV to the previous chapter. That's the only possible similarity they could have noticed. (Actually I'm assuming this structure is pretty widespread)

2. GOT is quite popular at the moment with the HBO series. Inexperienced reviewers will try to make comparisons to other work out there to have something to say. Yours, vs whatever is currently being hyped / raged about.

 

[Chessie]

The comment made to me was that it didn't read enough like it. Totally irritated me...why would I try and make my work out to be like someone else's?

Thank you for the advice, its definitely helpful. I do need to toughen up. :/

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Some great advice above.

In my opinion, learning to deal with critiques is merely a matter of perspective. It's easy to listen to praise & early on that's what everyone desires when they put their work out there for the first time. Those "this is awesome" comments just feel good. They reinforce our own belief in the work & ourselves as writers.

However, we learn more from constructive criticism. Constructive criticism is that which is given in the spirit of helping...partnering with the author to improve the piece. Also, it is criticism designed to assist the author with THEIR vision of style & story. Honestly, delivering a good critique is not easy. It's work. Understand this & learn to appreciate another's work geared towards helping your story. From the authors side, we need to learn to assess which critiques are constructive versus those which are not helpful.

Regardless though, when someone critiques your work & shows you something that didn't work for them, you should pay attention to those comments. Just don't listen to them when it comes to their opinions on how it SHOULD be rewritten... That's your job.

"Remember: when people tell you something's wrong or doesn't work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong."
- Neil Gaiman

A thick skin towards critique is something that's grown. You're not born with it. Everyone wants praise for work they pour their heart into. That's normal & perfectly understandable. You should feel some sense of accomplishment from just putting your work out there for the world to see. That, in and of itself, is not an easy task. It takes bravery, confidence, & a sincere desire to improve. Now, you need to take the next mental step...develop that perspective where you seek critique, and partners, that point out every potential flaw. As writers, we are often blind to those imperfections. They only become visible and clear when seen through the eyes of others. How can we fix errors we cannot see?

 

[Penpilot]

Yeah... pretty much what Steerpike said.

I stress the part where comments about the work are not comments about you as a person. If someone says your story sucks, they are not saying YOU suck. I think some writers have trouble differentiating that.

Also I like to be a realist. Have you ever watched American Idol auditions? Have you seen those people who's family and friends told them they're great singers but when they step on stage realize they're great singers... but only in the shower. When compared to professional singers, there's no comparison? I never want to ever be that deluded.

Remember critiquers are not always right. Part of your job is to absorb what they're saying in silence and judge after the fact whether what they said is valid or not. This judgement is important because it tests your decisions as a writer and your ability to justify your decisions and be confident about them in the face of someone telling you it's wrong.

I remember there used to be a guy in my writing group that would constantly say that they didn't get this or that about my stories and any time I used an idiom they'd say they didn't understand it and had to look it up. I had to make a judgement on if I wasn't giving enough info for the story to make sense and if I was using obscure idioms. After a few critiques from him, I came to the conclusion he was dead wrong and was pretty much full of it. Why? My firsts suspicion was he couldn't understand common idioms like "Let the cat out of the bag" and "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth." I believed these were things that I could reasonably expect the reader to understand, and then he let it slip that he was only skimming stories, not really reading them. As soon as I knew that I took his critiques with a mountain sized grain of salt.

Again, as said above, take what you need from a critique, throw away the rest.

 

[Alexandra]

Criticism is a virtually unavoidable aspect of art and being an artist. Consumers of art have the right to criticize that which they consume. Creators of art are obliged to weather the storms of criticism they may receive. The only way to avoid this is to create, but never show, your work; you avoid all criticism but you also avoid all acclaim—the choice is yours. How to deal with the critics?... tomorrow's another day.

 

[brokethepoint]

I would ignore the comparison unless if there are distinct similarities. Would I compare Rothfuss and GRRM, nope.

I would rather be compared to Rothfuss

I would look at what they are saying about your writing, are they giving you good info? Remember don't just change things because they say to, look at it analyze it and see how it will work. Not everything they say may be right.

 

[Alexandra]

Don't go onto twitter or search for yourself online, that's where self-esteem goes to die.

 

[wordwalker]

My rule for criticism is to take it like a poll.

That is, nobody's going to give you an opinion that's "right," or one that's simply "wrong" either. Instead you get different views, that are samples (ok, maybe skewed samples) of the readers you'll eventually have; someone would like more of one thing, someone else is from the small minority who managed to completely misread X, and so on.

Then, the writer's job is to take those views and decide how important each is, and how much different ways to satisfy each would hurt what the writing's really about. If someone always wants more description/action/whatever, maybe there's room for more-- or you might think you've done enough there and you take it in stride. When someone has even the pettiest problem, look around for an easy way to cover it for him and the other readers that will have the same quirk, but don't twist the story very far if it's a small thing.

You don't have to act on or trust any of these people; they're all human enough to be flat-out clueless sometimes, though again they're still worth cluing in. But all the same, they do represent some share of your readership and a priceless opportunity to get out of your own head, so they're never something to ignore either.

The rest is just practice. The story is what it is because it's personal, so of course getting other opinions are going to be painful; sometimes the only cure is just thickening the skin.

 

[Jabrosky]

For me, the problem is knowing what to do if you disagree with a particular critique. Disregarding them outright seems rude, but then so does debating their points with them. It's especially bad if the reviewer states their opinion as if it were objective fact, as if the changes they suggest must be made.

 

[Feo Takahari]

I think it's better to ignore them than to argue with them. You don't want to be known as the author who accuses readers of interrogating the text from the wrong perspective.

 

[Steerpike]

For me, the problem is knowing what to do if you disagree with a particular critique. Disregarding them outright seems rude, but then so does debating their points with them. It's especially bad if the reviewer states their opinion as if it were objective fact, as if the changes they suggest must be made.

I agree with Feo. Just say thanks and then ignore the critique. Debating with the person just makes the author look bad most of the time. Sometimes someone else besides the author will step in and say something. I know I don't have a problem pointing out things I see wrong when I read a critique of someone else's work. But when someone critiques my work, unless I have some follow up questions for them, I usually just say thanks and leave it at that. If they screwed up a critique so badly that I can't find any value in it, then it's hardly worth the effort to try to set them straight.

 

[Wanara009]

Well, I actually like it when I receive negative criticism. After all, the only way we learn from our mistake is to be aware of it in the first place. However, pleasing everyone is impossible so I found the best way to deal with criticism is to have many critics/beta-reader/etc. Find the common patterns amongst them all and focus your attention on that.

Personally, I treat criticism as 'advice' rather than 'fact'. It's my choice to agree with them or not but I appreciate all of it nonetheless. And if I don't agree, I will tell them my reasoning why and listen to the critic point of view with an open mind since they might turn me around with their argument.

 

[Devor]

I try to ignore it until I stop sobbing.

. . . . . .

Yeah, don't do that. You just have to focus on the work. I know your writing is personal, and oftentimes critiquers are jerks about it, but even if they say "You're awful, go back to grammar school!" they're only talking about the work. So put a filter on them: Can this comment help me make the work better? No? Ignore.

It's not always easy, but it helps to remember that it's not worth the emotional baggage of carrying the hostility of needing to process a bad review. Be humble enough to always consider yourself a person with lots to learn, and with a bit of experience you'll learn to nix the tough comments.

As for thinking you're not good enough to be compared to GRRM, well, lots of competent people think they're no good at what they do. Just fake it 'til you make it.

 

[Jamber]

There's negative, and then there's scathing... As long as the critiquer isn't trying to stop you from trying harder, they're giving you the most valuable gift of all: honesty.
Having said that, everyone needs to be told they're doing something right, even if it's only 'nice spelling'. It takes a long time to learn faith in one's own work. I really believe in not just picking the faults but saying what did work (if a writer seems fairly new to the job).
I agree with all the responses here, though -- don't be tempted to defend your work, and thank the critiquer. Pain is a necessary part of the process (just not only pain).
cheers
Jennie