Just some thoughts on critiques in general—opinions welcome.

I don't know how the rest of you handle critiques---(I'm not referring to the “I want to throw the darned thing into the wall sort of feeling”).

I skim them when I get them and then file them away. Though I have lost them at times doing this. Then at a later date I go through them–I print them and then go through the story with each one in hand.

One thing I have found—highlighting in any color other than yellow makes the text impossible to read–green and red are the worst. Chunks taken out of the story mean less printing but make the crit harder to follow. But the less printing is good–color ink is expensive.

This time around I have done my own red-line edit of my finished mss up to where my group is. I am now printing out the crits a member was nice enough to save and send me—(I lost the others in my big move). I go through each one and change or edit things that make sense to me or the effect I was going for.

One thing I have learned is that no matter how much you self-edit you miss stuff–typos, and misspellings–I have an aversion to commas–this I know. I’ve also learned a lot since belonging to regular crit groups—the first crits I got were hard to take–(I eventually came to the conclusion that the story did not work and no amount of fixing could save it) I no longer take crits personally and have learned to laugh at my own mistakes and learn form them. This is not easy. And there are times when some people lack all tact and tell you right out that YOU as a writer suck----(Take up one handed knitting you would be more useful that way)—that came from a major publishing house editor. So, whenever I feel the “this crit is going to get me down” I get out that rejection letter and read it. Nothing can be worse than that guy. (The story was later sold without much revision).

I work as an editor and I need an editor. Let me repeat that, I work as an editor and need an editor.

I’ll let that hang there for a moment.
Moment's up.

What does that mean? I think that if you are getting your first crits that you need to understand that you are god to your story you know it all, you want to tell it all, and you may leave things out that need to be said. This doesn’t mean you are a poor writer, or that your story sucks–it just means that you have to find that point of objectivity when revising any story. That’s not easy to do. I’m not there yet–but with every crit I am getting closer. I am surprised by the things some members say about my work----then I am more surprised when I look at my own red-line and discover that I now find some of the same things wrong. Yes, I am almost there.

Another thing is that, if you take a look of the published stuff, it's pretty easy to notice that (and sorry for the expersion) half of them are crap. So, in the bottom line, editing is about you and wanting to make your story more perfect (for nothing is Perfect). Publishers don't care so much about perfection, as salability.

Well, you didn't say anything about publishers, I know, but I wanted to. Just expresing my opinion.

Now, another thing about critiques --an advice, sort of-- is: be nice when you are critisizing (sic) someones work. If you are polite, there are more chances that this person will learn something.

Also, IMHO, it's important to be able to tell when someone's crit is true, or just to yeal at you. Yes, there are people who do that, because they had a bad day, they are rude, whatever.

The story you want to tell as a writer is a beautiful thing that lives inside your head.

When you try to put it down on paper, no matter how much you tweak it, you have to realize you are not going to be able to convey all of its wonderfulness in little black marks on a white sheet.

Words just aren't good enough, ever.

The best you can hope for is that the reader will look at those black marks and get some idea of the great story that lives in your head.

The purpose of a critique is to help you get those black marks on that paper to convey the story as well as possible.

In order to do this, a person giving a critique must first of all understand what the writer is trying to convey.

Next, the critiquer looks at the black marks and tries to figure out how to make them do a better job. (Sometimes, someone who is more objective than the writer can figure this out better than the writer can, at first, anyway.)

Then the critiquer must convey that information to the writer in such a way that it helps spark inspiration so that the writer can see better how the writer must change the writing. (Not how the critiquer would do it.)

As long as everyone remembers that the black marks are not the wonderful story, but a mere attempt at recreating the story in the reader's head, then suggestions on how to make those black marks do a better job are worthwhile.

Because if anyone has an attitude other than Bardos' suggestive one, they're not critiquing, they're bashing and writing their story, not mine. So I won't ask them to help any more.

I also ignore people who don't like my style. Critiquing my style is pointless; it's like critiquing my genetic make-up, it's who I am. People who critique sentence structure, spelling grammer, and who bother to tackle great big concepts, good on you! Mass kudos to you, I love people like you.

One thing that I worry about, though, is how to tell when the time comes to stop getting critiques. Because you could ask for them forever, and a piece could never get finished. How do you know when to stop, put down the metaphorical pen, and say 'this is done'?

Here endeth the ramble.

That is a good question. It is also where I am at right now. I went through the first nine chapters of my novel using my red-line and several crits. WOW what a change--you see I like getting effective crits as well. They help so much.

Then I started doing my pet errors check, for me that's commas mostly. Well, while I was concentrating on commas, I saw ways to fix little things that had been nagging at me as not quite right.

So, I agree with your question. A person could go on forever, I think, and never finish--the novel is finished, but I am thinking that I should set it aside as done after this last time through--so what did I do? I decided to run it past a second crit group I belong to. Just in case.

I have three more turns and the novel will have been by at least three people who give great crits. Once I have gone through the the last nine chapters with their crits---then I will be sending this one out into the world again.

It came so close last time----and I only sent it to 10 agencys.

Anyway--I think you know you are done when you start nit picking--should his car be blue or green? I have also found that when I am so sick of looking at the thing that I am ready to toss it in the can and flush, that I done.

Anyway, my point on critiquing style. First, it is subjective. So people will like it or not. But if you're fishing your story for crits, and submitting it to places you think will provide valuable crits, and many/most/all tell you that some element of your style is a complete hang up for them, and detracts from the story, I think you need to really consider that. You can certainly ignore the crits and simply scoff "hey, it's my style, and I'm not going to (or can't?) change." But then you need to consider that perhaps your style isn't working for the story you're trying to tell. Or, if you really must tell this story, then you need to consider how you're telling it, why it's not working for readers, and what you can/need to change to make it work. It's a judgment call on your part whether or not to make the changes or try to make them (I guess that's true for all crits, those on style or not).

If you're going to hold that your style is never-changing, then you need to also consider that your style may not be right for every story you try to tell, and that crits to that effect should be listened to with a writer's ear.

That is where I trash the “you style should be” crit. I would certainly take into account comments on style if the reader felt it were not working, but not when the critique says that it has to be this way because Ap says so, or according to Stunk and White----one thing about writing--there are no absolute rules--(I don't speak of grammar here and even that can be bent if it’s done right)-- otherwise we'd all have one reference book on the subject--How to write your novel, a guide. Everything would be the exact same way. I don't know about you, but one wall in my office is covered in book shelves---one 30 inch wide and 5 ft tall case is entirely "how to write books". I have five others filled with reference books. (Yes, I spend a lot of money at amazon and writers digest books)

Each person needs to find what works for them and most importantly what works for their intended audience.

So comments on style in that area are always welcome!

An aside as an example. I have reviewed a short at the del rey workshop that didn't punctuate dialogue properly. She used periods instead of commas -- "I like your style." She said. "Can I borrow it?" and it was very distracting. I told her that if she was being stylistic, it wasn't working for me, and I had to imagine an editor/publisher would see it as amaturish rather than stylish. If it wasn't part of her style, she needed to review Elements of Style (I gave her the benefit of the doubt that it was a stylistic choice on her part). That's an example of a wirter's 'style' distracting from the story.

Now on the other hand, I read a story that was quite loose and bizarre in the style it was written, but he seemed to have the complete package of 'weird' and it worked for me, so there you go. <grin>

JP

[This message has been edited by JP Carney (edited December 13, 2001).]

A note on the "Take the bus." He said. In the editing I do I see that a lot. I have even had people argue that "I was taught to do it that way!" My daughter who is almost eight likes to write and she was doing that. I asked her why. It seems she had the idea that you ended with a period and then since it was a new sentence you had to have a cap letter. Needless to say we went back to her Language Arts book and repeated a few lessons.

There are several good books and sites out there that offer grammar classes---many for free. Don't confuse bad grammar with personal style. I am a rotten speller--always have been---but bad spelling is not a personal style.

Have you had any luck with Del Rey as far as gathering crits on your stuff? I only got a few and then none--several times in a row and they were not the helpful sort.

I need a dedicated reader to go through my current novel--just seems no one wants to. <sigh> All in one chunk anyway.

JP Carney: "That really get's on my nerves, too." I said. Actually, this IS bad grammar, for the quotations are only to help you realize it's dialogue. You could, also, write it that way, without them: <<That really get's on my nerves, I said.>> And, if you don't put comma here, but period, it doesn't make sense.
In the older books (at least in Greece, where I live), they didn't put quotation marks (" "); the putted a dash in front of the begining of dialogue. Like this:

--That really get's on my nerves, I said.

So the (" ") are only to help you understand more easily if someone is talking, or if it's a writer's discription or character's thought, etc. They are not grammar; comma is grammar.

Will.

I currently have 3 shorts up there. They have up to 40 views and the most crits are up to 5 on two of them. I have been told that the ratio can be 10:1 or worse, but that that could be a good thing. It could just mean that you are at a level with your writing that people just can't find anything really to say about it. My crits are usually (if the grammar, spelling, and style are cohesive)questions. Why this, where did this come from, who is this, etc. Sometimes, that helps. And, if I can't spot a problem and like what is written, I email the author personally to tell him or her so. Same if I received a decent crit -- I let them know that it was helpful. It is only good form, what?

Willis Couvillier
WillC

I have gotten to the point where I love to get crits. Yes, there are times when they make so mad I could cry. I yell at the computer screen--"You idiot. Did you even read the story!" Then I settle down and think–O.K., if they didn’t get it, and the three other people didn’t get it—then maybe the hint was too subtle and I need to re-word.

The frustration I am running into with my current book is with the length of time between my turn in the group. I am getting many comments about things because they have forgotten what was said in the previous chapter. I should take the time to write a brief “the story so far—“ but I have a hard time fitting in enough time to write lately, much less do a mini synop for every three chapters. Oh well, the group I have right now is very helpful for the most part–and I am glad for that! Thanks guys.

I may go check out the Del Ray site again.

One thing about IMHO. That expression annoys me. Obviously, what someone says to you in a critique is their own opinion. Hopefully, it is said sensitively and politely, but I certainly wouldn't want someone to write a critique using their roommmate's opinion. I guess my ninth grade English teacher drilled Strunk and White into our heads pretty hard!

I think those of us who have been criting for a long time have been stung and have felt the brunt of someone we stung--so we resort to IMHO to remind that person that they can take it or leave it and that it is not personal---though it seems the things that get stamped that way are the things that really do not work in a person's story.

A kinda---this is going to hurt me more than you thing--yeah right ma.

All of us have sensitive points and I have a wicked temper to go with it. Not a good combo. LOL

IN the gorup I am in I have seen great improvment in the people that I have been wiht for a time now--and I know that I stung a bit at first and maybe I still do--I'm a blunt sorta persoon. But--I will always be willing to help someone with their work. I remember well what it was like to be told---SHwo don't tell---and i didn't have a clue what the sam they were tlaking about and they weren't willing to explain or didn't know how to.

Liza--your writing has improved greatly and the info dump thing---a thing of the past as far as I can see.

Perhaps the most important skill in dealing with criticizm is the ability to "critique the critique", that is, to be able to weigh the value an perspective of the review, thus allowing you to effectively integrate it into your mindset, and the changes into your work.

The most common reviews many of us come across are movie reviews. If I go online, I will give much more weight to a three-paragraph piece, which eloquently treats the various aspects of the film, and draws conclusions in a reasonable way. If the review simply says "crap" or "I hated it. What a piece of junk", well...

Of course, most critiques at least try to appear erudite. But with practice, one can learn to recognize certain types:

-Those that address inappropriate areas: Eg. something that purports to be a review of the technical aspects of a piece, but seems to focus on the plot.

-Snobs: People who only respect things that are avant-garde and weird, and slam anything traditional.

-People who don't know what they're talking about: These are difficult. But they can be sniffed out with time.

-People who claim to be the be-all and end-all of critical thought. The people who say "I don't care what anyone else says. They're wrong. Your piece is awful".

-Mean people: Those who slam everyone's writing.

These are just a few. And I admit that it can seem like an insurmountable task to try and weigh them. But the most important step is learning that different critiques really do have wildly different values. Some are incredibly helpful and incisive, while others are not worth the scribbled graphite on your manuscript.

It is the double-edged sword of letting go and soliciting outside advice, and yet retaining ones own sense of personal worth.

A quick story:

My proudest academic accomplishment from university was a critique project in a 4th year History class. We had all written long papers, consisting of reviews of a particular book. The class was then divided into two groups, and we each read and reviewed the papers of those in the other group (without knowing what mark the teacher had graded them). Following this, we had a round table discussion where we attempted to come to a consensus about the grade of each paper, and finally the professor came in to hear our findings and reveal his grades.

My group fought it out over the papers, and we generally managed to come to a consensus of the salient problems and points of each, managing finally to assign them a grade. But one paper was beyond us. Everyone else in the class gave it super marks -- the lowest was a B+. I however, refused to go above a C-, and I considered that to be too generous. We argued and argued. I didn't deny that it was quite well written, I didn't deny that he had followed the proper technical format, and I didn't deny that he had a pleasant style. But I still graded it a Fail, while they gave it an A average.

Finally, the professor came in and we told him what had happened. To everyone's shock and loud disbelief, he had graded the paper even lower than I had (since it's not his job to be generous), and given it an F.

The problem, you see, was that the writer of the paper had completely misunderstood ther objective of the paper topic. The rest of the group couldn't see past the fact that it was a GOOD essay to the fact that it was the WRONG essay. His crucial misunderstanding of the topic made his paper, however well written, a complete failure of the stated objective.

The point of the story is that no matter how qualified the person critiquing you may be, their critique can still be somewhat or completely inapproriate. You can't let that depress or saden you, or turn you aside from your writing. Perhaps they misunderstand your objective.

I am always amazed though, at some of the crits a person gets. I have some stuff at DelRey---the average rating is 4.57 out of 5--9 reviews. I posted a new section and had a 5 out of 5--here comes this guy and gives me basically a 2 with a scrambled 3 paragraph review that didn't make much sense and ended with “in proper English never start a sentence with a prepositional phrase”—in BOLD CAPS.

I have chosen to ignore his nasty remarks and scrambled review. Because, basically he doesn’t know what he is talking about. The story is first person and has a lot internal monolog and though processes. If he had taken the time to explain himself with cited examples, I would pay attention—but as he didn’t—well file 13 with that one. It’s too bad that I am his first crit there—I can only hope he learns with experience, or if he is a troll—(he doesn’t have any writing up there) that he goes away. I’ve had those before—they seek out people with a high rating and give them all 2’s or 1’s just to bring their number down.

I am writing a column for February for an e-zine on How do you handle a crit. Thanks all for the info and insight.

Shawn