You need to...
Never...
Don't...
You can't...
Cut this.
Rewword this.
What a cliche.
This is terrible.

Out of respect, I'll just hide my response then.

I know it is upsetting, but if you only looked at what they were trying to say. Then you could determine if you agreed with it or not.

I'm usually happy to hear people making comments, even if I don't agree with them. I will often times go back and concider the suggestion, what it would do, how it would change the story. Gives me some ideas sometimes.

I learned a few things about myself. First off, I learned that I was most sensitive to critiques of my pieces that I already knew were sub-par. Second, I learned that you take what you get, you don't get upset, you learn to let the hard stuff roll off your back.

I have yet to be subjected to a critique at this site that is nearly as hard-hitting as many I received for my photogs in college. That makes me wonder if you all aren't just being a little overly nicety-nice and not hitting hard enough. Am I hitting hard enough to help you improve your writing?

The point is, no one is here to offend. We're here to help.

BUT, one must NEVER be impolite in doing so. I don't mind people telling, rather than suggesting. Either way I figure it's their opinion. I can accept it or burn it.

I'm blowing her cover, but I didn't want to watch people offering her advice on how to turn the other cheek.

There are times when a critique has made me bristle into defensiveness and I have to wait for a while before I can find the content without noticing the tone. I'm exploring Zoetrope for additional feedback (lest anyone who has recently critiqued me think that I am speaking of them) and it happens that Christine and Dakota made some of the same points as other reviewers, but I could use their information immediately because they took the additional, small effort to offer it in a supportive manner.

Here are two examples of the same comment from actual reviews. "My only reservation is that occasionally the prose is overdone. That is, you out-Austen Austen. Here's an example: ...[example was provided in original] I think that "mounted...missive...missive...poured...alacrity" is too rich. Austen was deliberately dry partly because other authors of the period were overwrought."

Versus: "[same passage quoted] This is really overdone. Your use of the metaphors and conventions of a computer and the internet cheapens your story; then to encase it in overwrought psuedo-Victorian language adds insult to injury. In my mind, honed by hours of reading stories with complex problems and deep characters, this just doesn’t foot the bill. Cut back the language."

Which would you find easier to extract the suggestion from? Granted, this is an extreme example, but for me, if I'm going to spend the time to read a story and write suggestions, I want it to be in a form that the author can use. Otherwise I feel like, I'm wasting my time and raising their blood pressure for nothing.

Critiques do not always burn like insults. I was also an art major and critiquing was a huge, necessary part of my life. I love a harsh critique. Heck, Survivor will rake me up and down the coals, but he makes it clear by his phrasing that it is just his opinion and that he's saying it to help me make my story better. And he does not suffer fools gladly, but his critiques never make me angry.

May I might suggest taking a look at Christine's list of phrases again? If you find yourself using phrases from the second set more frequently, you might consider taking an extra moment to "translate" your next critique. It is possible that might help your words get through.

And as it happens, Mary's wasn't the first compliment I received on my feedback skills, it was the third. (And they all made me feel so good, actually.) So I started looking at the way I worded things and posted them here so you could all see.

We've had enough discussions about how to take feedback. Heck, I've started some of them. We could even start another one if you wanted, but this thread was meant to be seen from the POV of the critiquer, offering advice in a supportive and helpful manner so that the author can more easily read and take helpful advice away from the critique.

Oh yeah, Mary and Dakoat are also quite good and providing supportive feedback.

Having said that...I usually receive a critique like the following:

1) Anger and dissbelief. "How the h*** can they say that about my piece? They don't know what they're talking about."
2) Despondency. "OH, why bother? This will never be publishable anyway..."
3) Acceptance. "Rich, you stupid twit, they're right. Look at all this room for improvement..."

Then I actually sit down and take what I think works from the comments and revise. In almost every case...no matter how harsh the crit...I have been very grateful.

Example: Survivor ripped into me pretty hard on a story he was nice enough to critique for me. Did it piss me off? Very much so. Did I get over it? Luckily, yes, because it turns out there were a lot of very helpful comments in there. The ending was completely revamped because of what he said, and it's a whole lot stronger now.

DJVDakota was nice enough to smack me around about a part of a story that everyone else pretty much loved. I thought about it and realized, "You know what? She's on to something. That part is completely false to the characters and their story."

Do you know how may critiques I've had? About 20 or so (possibly exaggerating) but I personally have never taken anything to heart about what anyone has had to say. You know why? Because I ASKED for THEIR opinion on the subject.

Has anyone made me angry? To tell you the truth I don't know, pessimistic as if I could be a writer, possibly. Have I ever been discouraged about writing, you bet.
But I have found out that if I go with a few suggestions here and there, I feel myself getting more and more confident in my abilities and talent.
Over all, I personally think that in no way, shape or form, a critique is not an attack on anyone(or at least not intentional)

My thoughts.
You know, after looking at this post, this is the longest one I've done.

-BHJr-

There is a distinct difference between a harsh critique and a rude one. I'll tell you something, the best critiques that I get are generally from the best writers. I suspect that has a lot to do with an awareness of the power of words.

Many people here are confusing harshness and honesty with rudeness. At all times, I am brutally honest with what I think the strengths and weaknesses of a piece are. Nevertheless, there are polite and supportive ways of phrasing your critiques so that they are more benefitial because the author does not have to real from the force of the blow before coming back to understand the helpfulness. I always always always tell the author exactly what is wrong with their story. But rather than saying, "Your main character is unsympathetic." I say, "I did not manage to form any sympathy for your main character. I think this is because of his harsh manner of speech and his foul language." The first is combative and leads to a hopelessness because what is the author to do? The second says the same thing, provides a specific rationale, and does so in a supportive manner.

Look, we're all writers here. Good writers need to know how to evoke the correct emotional response in their readers otherwise they can't be good writers. The correct emotional response to evoke when WRITING a critique is one that says something like, "I see their point, and I can fix that and become a better writer now." rather than one that says, "I really feel as if this is a terrible story becuase of what the person said but I know I need to be a big person and take it in the spirit they meant it and despite their harsh language I know they meant to be helpful and so I will thank them and come back tomorrow when I can peel the helpfulness away from these critiques and make this a better story."

I'm afraid I give some when I'm critiquing, but I try to keep them to suggestions about word phrasing and rhythm rather than story line. But I give critique and suggestions wherever I feel they're needed. If the story isn't working maybe a few suggestions will help lead the writer in a new direction that he/she hadn't thought of before. Even then I try to keep them light and leading, rather than trying to wrestle the wheel from the driver.

Whatever. Doesn't bother me. Let it slide. Take it or leave.

I also don't mind when folks give me specific suggestions. Even if I don't take all of them, it does help to get me thinking of story alternatives.

Here's how I see it: I'm not perfect. Never will be. This translates equally into "my fiction will never be perfect." But... but... but... I, the ever-striving perfectionist, really want it to be as close to perfect as I can. Therefore...

If you "show" me a way to do it better, or even a different way, I've learned something. Simple as that. My ego is unharmed. Everyone has their own way of criticizing, and let's face it... it's really a method of teaching, is it not?

The best way to teach is to show how it's done, and then let someone loose to do it for themselves. It's up to the "student" to decide for him/herself if what they've been told is useful or should be tossed away like yesterday's trash.

When I rewrite someone's words, the reasons are threefold:
1. It's easier and shorter to get my point across.
2. I'm learning as I do it, improving my ability to write better .
3. Because I truly want for all of us to be better writers. Honestly. Why would I bother otherwise? I'm not a spiteful person.

I find it frustrating when someone responds by saying "This is awkward" or "I'm confused" without saying what or why they react that way. If you can identify what in the writing made you respond, it would probably be more useful.

I'm not and expert, I'm not even a published writer, and so part of me is always thinking, "Why should my opinion count?" To prevent apologizing for actually having an opinion, I probably end up being short. (And here I am, apologizing! ) Ok, enough of that. I think, reviewing, like writing, takes practise.

quote:

---

I'm not and expert, I'm not even a published writer, and so part of me is always thinking, "Why should my opinion count?"

---

I'm so glad you asked! So let me explain why, exactly, your opinion should count.

Your opinion counts because you are an expert and prolific reader. It is not only other writers who read our work, in fact, it is almost never other writers who read out work, it is readers.

If you have not read "How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy" by OSC, you should pick it up. Towards the back he has a great description of a wise reader critique, and it works better than any other kind I've seen.

When you read, you are unconsciously asking yourself 3 questions from time to time...."Oh yeah?" in disbelief, "Huh?" in confusion, and "So What?" in that the spot on the wall has just become amazingly more interesting than the book. A wise reader pays attention to when he/she is asking these questions and lets the author know exactly when they asked it and what it was they were asking about. They do not offer unsolicited suggestions for how to fix these problem, but let the author decide how best to deal with the confusion, boredom, or disbelief in a way that fits his own plot and goals for the piece.

That said, I do offer advice when I provide feedback, especially to writers whose work is raw. More experienced or practiced writers can usually use the wise reader feedback without additional advice, (Or if they need it, they can ask.) but novice writers sometimes need to know, for example, that opening with an info dump produces not just any "So what?" but a fatal "So waht?" that will keep the piece permanently in the slugh. Suggesting that they find some nice conflict to start with may be warranted.

BUT....to tie this back to the question that spawned this post...if you are not a published writer you may or may not have the particular authority to provide good suggestions for change. I've gotten some awful suggestions for how to fix those problems from people. That's not to say that I can't usually tell the good from the bad and take some and leave some....but the truth is that often beginning writers don't have this skill at all. They see advice and take it without understanding how to implement it properly or without (in some case) knowing that it is the worst advice they could possibly take. I did this at first, ruining stories when I first started receiving feedback on my ideas because I made every change that people suggested without really knowing which ones I should ignore and how to implement the good pieces of advice.

quote:

---

And so long as you are identifying specific problems you have with a piece then you do not have to have ever even written anything before, let alone published anything. You need only be a reader, with a wise reader ability to pay attention to how you feel as you read

---

EDIT: I misread the original post. I don't think I've ever done the "You need" part.

There is something I DO mind in a big way. A writer has an obligation to do the research and get it right. Similarly, one doing a crit has an obligation to point out something if and only if he KNOWS something is incorrect about setting, historical facts, etc. I did a 13 liner here - and some pointed out where I had gone wrong with the "facts." I had done my research, It was they who were shooting from the hip and frankly, didn't know what they were talking about. If they can't get THEIR "facts" right, then how far can you trust what they give you in a crit?

[This message has been edited by nitewriter (edited April 03, 2006).]

For most things, I just note that I noticed something (good or bad) and leave it up to the writer to decide what to do about that.

For instance, when I shoot from the hip about accuracy, I usually say something like "I don't think many people are going to buy this without a better explanation". If I'm pretty sure that there's an inaccuracy but I don't think it's critical, I just mention that it seems unlikely. If I spot a critical error and I'd be totally unwilling to buy a story that made such an egregious error (no matter what research the author claims to have done on the subject), then I say so in no uncertain terms.

Looking over any of my crits, I find plenty of gentler phrases from the first list and quite a few from the second list. Most of my comments don't fall on either list, they are simply comments about the text, not what the writer should do about it. I find each type of comment useful in response to a different kind of situation, so I use whatever I feel is appropriate. A gentle suggestion for a tentative effect, an unvarnished rejection for things I will not tolerate in writing.

I always try to soften things up by mentioning what I like as well.

I write critiques with the notion that I may not know what I am talking about 90% of the time (this is a pretty solid assessment- considering I haven't been published).

When I "get" a critique- I always try to keep a few things firmly in mind. "Structure" critiques come from the emotion centers of the brain- "does it flow", "does it make sense", "is the character believable".

"Grammar" critiques come from the frontal lobes. Comma here, wrong definition, no semicolon.

If someone starts a critique with "I noticed your verb tense....", expect the very next line to be "found your story slow and confusing".

Don't sweat it. You must critique your critiques. Every critique has something valuable to say... you just have to find it.

quote:

---

Eh, you shouldn't usually pick out individual darlings to murder, just marking them all for death and letting the author sort them out is enough.
The above comment probably lacks the referential tone I was hoping to achieve, eh?

---

For whatever it may be worth, I think I got the reference, Arnold Amalric, er, I mean, Survivor, whether the tone was referential or not.

And it's a cool bit of advice to critiquers at the same time.

The way my teachers taught me my grammar and such was slow and boring so I often fell asleep during class.

I don't know enough about writing to critique, so I don't critique work often enough and when I do, I usually don't see anything wrong.

Do you read? Do you know what you like to read? Is the thing you just read something you like to read? There, you critiqued it!

However, one thing I have noticed time and time again is that a good "grammar/nit" critique and a good "plot/character" technique rarely happen at the same time.

>~Alethea

I agree it can be done with practice.

I still maintain that the functions are separate and handled by different parts of the brain. I do believe revving up the analytical part of the brain is the last thing you want to do.

My bestest most recent example. I posted 13 lines and mentioned the main character's name twice- Forrest.

It was a terrible intro and someone gave me a very good, line-by-line, detailed analysis of what they though of each line. They even mentioned the main character.... Frank.

My point being- analysis is good, but you automatically trade emotional involvement and a loss of high level perspective when you employ it.

quote:

---

Do you read? Do you know what you like to read? Is the thing you just read something you like to read? There, you critiqued it!

So don't do the grammar part if you don't know a noun from a metaphor, although you should probably learn the difference for your own writing.

---