A couple of weeks ago, I suggested that writers looking for critique to improve their work should ask for it. This was a common sense recommendation, but it left a number of well-meaning would-be critics at a loss on how to do that well.
I've been looking through various style guides, editorial manuals and the like, and have concluded that most of these recommendations seems to be for either peer-reviewed academic work, journalistic editorial, or simply "how to appreciate creative writing."
All well and good, but it seems less relevant to those of us trying to help others with their work or how to interpret or solicit cogent feedback from those assisting us.
I've gleaned the following from many sources, no one of which was definitive. I'd like to hear WE Group members' thoughts on these recommendations, and any suggestions for additional guidelines.
- First, be a reader not a writer. Many of us write (which is what attracted us to Writing Essential in the first place), and we sometimes automatically think to ourselves "I would have done that differently." When you're tearing through a wonderful novel, short story, essay or other work, you probably don't have that critical thinking mode turned on. Read a piece through as a reader, without regard for the many things you would do differently. Overlook spelling or grammar errors. Seek the author's perspective. The most valuable feedback a writer can get is whether readers understand what she is conveying.
- Avoid being judgmental. This is tough to do, particularly for those of us who are tough on our own work. Don't start off a sentence with "I didn't like X" or "I loved Y." Tell the author WHAT you didn't like and why. Consider the difference between: "I really didn't like how you ended this piece." vs. "I think you could make the ending stronger if you resolved the protagonist's problem with his spouse." Specificity is most helpful to a writer.
- Look for the specific elements that make writing work, and offer suggestions or comments about how those parts work.
- Dialogue: Does it resonate? Is it believable?
- Imagery: How well does the author describe what is happening in a way that uses the senses?
- Cliches and hackneyed phrases: Too much of either makes the writing stale.
- Telling vs. showing: Is the author spending too much time telling us what happened instead of showing us what happened? Consider the difference between: "She closed the car door and went into the house, crying about her terrible night." vs. "The clunk of the car door brought back a swirl of emotions. She gazed at the front door through a haze of tears, her chest hitching like an old horse. Head down, mascara running down her nose, she climbed the interminable path to her last refuge."
- Plot, structure: How did the story work for you? Can you relate to what happened? If not, any thoughts on what would help? Were you confused? Were there too many extraneous details?
- Feeling: Most importantly, how did you feel after reading this piece? If it was poetry, what emotions did it evoke? For fiction, could you put yourself into the story? If not, what suggestions do you have that help the author make it better for you?
- Be kind. If you absolutely hate a piece, don't humiliate the writer. Use private emails to convey any stinging or harsh criticisms you might have. As Stephen King said, editing is the act of murdering your children. Don't call someone's baby ugly in public. If the criticism is important, give it to the writer constructively and in private. Most of us have some ego else we would never publish in public here on Gather. Keep that in mind as you press "enter."
As a writer it is helpful to know where you think your work is in terms of fit and finish. If it's a first draft, you might do well to edit it profusely before handing it over for a thorough review as I've suggested.
It helps if you tell your prospective readers that it needs a good grammar, spelling or style check, so they can pull out their mental red pencils first. In my experience, this kind of editing is very different than being a reader. It's very exacting, and often pedantic regarding form. If you just want to "gut check" your plot, don't ask for a style check too.
These are just the initial principles I could put together from a number of sources. If you have others, please suggest them.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 24
This is my favorite thing that you've said:
Be kind. If you absolutely hate a piece, don't humiliate the writer. Use private emails to convey any stinging or harsh criticisms you might have. As Stephen King said, editing is the act of murdering your children. Don't call someone's baby ugly in public. If the criticism is important, give it to the writer constructively and in private.
On this, we're rather on the same page. My first thought is a beginning writer who is just starting out, but is terrified to post anything publicly - they might have a diary, that no one reads, but them. Those people (in just my opinion) are the easiest to hurt, more apt to gather up their courage, receive no encouragement and never write publicly again. I've seen it too many times.
If I think the ending could be better differently, that doesn't mean the writer does, for whatever reason. So I don't say things like that. I do believe in not criticism, but kind critque' and only when the person feels ready to ask for it, right at the bottom of a post. It would be the same place they'd ask for help on grammar, but encouragement ought to always (again, just my thoughts) come first.
What I learned in three different writing classes, about critique'
1. Say something nice about the piece, encouraging, if you will.
2. Mention, as a suggestion what could be changed, if it's grammar, do it kindly.
3. Find something else, anything, to encourage, even if it's a sentence that you really liked.
Thanks for this. I hope I didn't comment too much!
Marilyn (GWE, Monday) and here I am reading your Tuesday! :)
Thanks for commenting on your "day off"! :)
I think it's the job of more experienced writers to encourage newer writers. This means paying attention to the impact of critiques. You can teach a young writer a lot by shredding their early attempts, but you risk stopping them from ever writing again. There is no way to tell that the writer of a hackneyed, ungrammatical, poorly plotted story can't learn and grow into a great artist given guidance and encouragement.
I'm posting because I like what you have to say, not because it's my day off :)
Marilyn (but I'm taking a nap)
Couple of further thoughts: I received my training in leading writing workshops from the AWA (Amherst Writers and Artists). Pat Schneider, who founded that organization 20 years ago, suggests that when people critique the first thing they offer HAS to be something that is strong, positive and that works in or for the manuscript. That keeps it from being just a witchhunt for what doesn't work.
Another technique for workshopping that I think is really important is that the writer just listen during the critiquing - listen and make notes. At the end, they can ask for clarification of points they don't understand, but they should not get involved in trying to explain or defend their manuscript, nor refute the critiques. (Of course if the critiquing is handled well, hopefully they won't feel the need to "defend" themselves either.
Anyway, great points. Thanks for the article.
I really like the advice about finding one strong positive part of the work before critiquing.
Wilka
PS. The door is always open for input on any of my postings.
Predominantly, they are essays though, and not novels, novelettes or stories.
So what else is new?
I've used a format recommended by The Loft Literary Center in Minneapolis: What works and what needs work. It's a great way to blend critique with reinforcement.
Thanks for stopping by!