When does it cross the line?

Reziac · Oct 6, 2014

Shadow_Ferret said:
See, now I read that anecdote about Asimov and Campbell and I think, "That wasn't very helpful. Was there nothing worthwhile in Asimov's writing? No glimmer of talent? No hope?"

And to my ear, having in ages past read a lot of Asimov (including nonfiction), it sounds like one of those little mostly-fictional anecdotes he was fond of.

Shadow_Ferret said:
I've taken fiction workshops and I've submitted to SYW. Because I'm what amounts to being tone-deaf to ky own writing, by the time I've rewritten the story according to all the suggestions, its not my story any more. Its become a collaboration, its THEIR story and whatever was mine has been red-penned out.

That's definitely a problem. But how much of it is being "tone-deaf" and how much is not yet having enough confidence in your own words? That's when it might help the most to put the story aside for several months, until you've mostly forgotten the details of the writing, and only then consider editing it. At that point it's more fresh to your eyes, and you can edit as if you're critting a stranger without losing your own voice.

GigiF · Oct 6, 2014

Firstly - it's very important not to take anything personally. Criticism is not an attack on you or your creative genius.

Secondly - learn how to understand exactly what the critiquer is saying. What don't they like and exactly why?

For me this means entering dialogue about your work.

If someone told me my book was boring but couldn't tell me why that might be very frustrating. So it's up to me to try and prize it out of them. But they have to be willing to enter that discussion with me.

If the person can tell me why they found it boring, then I might disagree. But again, it's up to me to try and understand where they're coming from. Is the subject matter just not to their taste? Do they prefer action in the books whereas I've written a slow paced, technical, thoughtful book?

I remember the first time I gave my kids my MS to read. They got about 4 chapters in and I realised they didn't want to read on. I was mortified of course and they seemed to be telling that they just didn't find it interesting. But after extended talks it turned out that they couldn't understand half of what was going on because they didn't recognise or understand so many of the words!

After a long re-write where I toned that down, they loved it. I'm keeping them waiting for the next bunch of chapters and they've both asked 'when are they going be ready?'. Which is a good sign. LOL.

In summary. For me, critiquing is a two way discussion.

Roxxsmom · Oct 6, 2014

GigiF said:
In summary. For me, critiquing is a two way discussion.

Absolutely, but snark and absolutist comments tend to shut that down.

Someone I don't know reads my MS and says, "Watching paint peel would be more interesting than finishing this," then there's not really much to discuss, and there are a million reasons why it could be boring them anyway.

Now if they say, "The first chapter is all backstory, but nothing happens, and I'm not getting a sense of who the protagonist is or what they want. I think some of the background you raise here could be much more interesting if they're dribbled into the story bit by bit as it unfolds. But then, I'm the kind of reader who needs something to happen early on to engage with a story." then that's much more interesting and informative.

That's the point I was trying to make. You don't have to lie and say it's wonderful for you when it isn't, but if you don't know the writer well enough to see how they would take or interpret terse, obscure or snarky comments, then maybe reining them in is a good idea.

Tact and courtesy are not weaknesses, damn it

Jack Oskar Larm · Oct 6, 2014

Critiquing, like writing -- like most things in life -- is a skill borne of practice. The relationship -- the pact -- between writer and critic cannot be taken for granted. It happens so often that the dynamic is simply wrong and ill-fitting. Offering up your work for critique can create an imbalance, where the writer assumes a position of submission while the critic holds the power. This power, like all power, can be abused, especially in the hands of someone lacking the maturity to wield it. Examples of this are almost everywhere you care to look.

As writers we have to remind ourselves not to give away our power. In fact, the power is all ours; we just chose to share it. To often we give it all away. No wonder we can feel hurt and betrayed and humiliated.

However, we need to have this relationship, so the onus of how deeply we give of ourselves is entirely on us. If it's a bad relationship, walk away. It may take a certain amount of perspective, but I think it's easy to recognise a good, healthy relationship. One of the obvious clues to this is knowing that the critic has genuinely found something you had missed.

Chasing the Horizon · Oct 6, 2014

Assuming the anecdote about Asimov is true, it would still be a rare and exceptional case where a talented writer was motivated by treatment that would've demoralized 99% of people. It's kind of like the case I read a while back where a woman's depression was cured after a severe concussion. Just because it worked in that one case doesn't mean we should start whacking everyone with depression over the head, because 99% of them would end up the same, worse, or dead.

If I decide to actually critique a piece of writing that completely sucks, I just point out two or three things the person could work on. If they're really doing everything wrong it would just be overwhelming as well as demoralizing to point out every single problem. It's pretty rare to find a piece of writing without one single redeeming feature, though.

celticroots · Oct 6, 2014

Chasing the Horizon said:
Assuming the anecdote about Asimov is true, it would still be a rare and exceptional case where a talented writer was motivated by treatment that would've demoralized 99% of people. It's kind of like the case I read a while back where a woman's depression was cured after a severe concussion. Just because it worked in that one case doesn't mean we should start whacking everyone with depression over the head, because 99% of them would end up the same, worse, or dead.

If I decide to actually critique a piece of writing that completely sucks, I just point out two or three things the person could work on. If they're really doing everything wrong it would just be overwhelming as well as demoralizing to point out every single problem. It's pretty rare to find a piece of writing without one single redeeming feature, though.

I am relieved to know that I am in the 99% of people who would feel demoralized by that type of treatment. And that it's normal.

Primus · Oct 6, 2014

I don't like criticism that is overly harsh and cruel anymore than you do. I want constructive criticism that can help me improve as a writer, but we don't always get that because some people just don't care what they say and how they say it. They're the trashtalkers who really want to crush someone's pride. In the end, ultimately, even if you have positive critiques, you have to believe in yourself and the work you created. That's the passion that will drive you forward. If you can't summon that or feel it, then most certainly you won't get far. It'll be an psychological impasse forever in place.

Jcomp · Oct 7, 2014

Interesting thread. For whatever it's worth, I think critiques only "cross the line" when they become blatantly personal, or if there's a direct statement made to the effect of "you'll never be able to do this, just give up." Otherwise, I think harsh criticism has its place.

celticroots · Oct 8, 2014

Lego Bono said:
I don't like criticism that is overly harsh and cruel anymore than you do. I want constructive criticism that can help me improve as a writer, but we don't always get that because some people just don't care what they say and how they say it. They're the trashtalkers who really want to crush someone's pride. In the end, ultimately, even if you have positive critiques, you have to believe in yourself and the work you created. That's the passion that will drive you forward. If you can't summon that or feel it, then most certainly you won't get far. It'll be an psychological impasse forever in place.

That's very true.

J.S.F. · Oct 11, 2014

Receiving a harsh critique on your work is one thing. It can be a soul-shattering experience, but at the same time you have to learn not to take it personally. If they wrote, for example, "The main character is not very interesting, there's too much info dump, and the situation is totally unreal" then you know what to fix.

OTOH, if they write something to the effect that you're talentless, stupid, and that three primates could do a better job of writing and don't offer any constructive criticism, well, then this is something personal, something mean, and something you should discount right away.

I've been savaged by criticism before, but it was never personal. I wondered if the person who read my novel had actually read it, but then I reread her crit and thought, okay, maybe she has a point. (I ended up thanking her, anyway).

So FWIW, let savage barbs flung at your writer's breast bounce off if and only if they are without purpose and are of a personal nature. But do take in criticism if it's tactfully given. That is how we can all improve.

Carmen Baxter · Oct 11, 2014

Someone once told me that criticism consists of three parts. To tell you what works, what doesn't work, and what you can do to make it work.

So saying "this sounds flat" is bad criticism. "This is a big moment, but it sounds flat. Consider adding an emotion and an internal thought" is great criticism.

I'm sorry to say it's that simple. I can take harsh criticism all day, and relish it when people tear my stuff to pieces, but only when they tell me in what way something is wrong. Otherwise their comments are not just rude, they're unhelpful, which is much worse.

Just my two cents...

phantasy · Oct 11, 2014

It's interesting to me how crits are like relationships. Not everyone is match for each other. Some critters are willing to give and take, while others refuse any leeway on what they say. Some even will act like you should be so thankful that they spent any time on you.

I can take a tough crit, but one critter kept insulting my characters and I kept ignoring it, kept ignoring it and when I finally called out their comments as hurtful, they got offended. Couldn't do me the courtesy to respect my discomfort.

So like any relationship, sometimes you have to figure out when to ditch the abusive ones and recognize the ones that are truly helpful.

When does it cross the line?

Reziac

Resident Alien

GigiF

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido

Jack Oskar Larm

Just me and my guitar

Chasing the Horizon

Blowing in the Wind

celticroots

Primus

Del Lago

Jcomp

celticroots

J.S.F.

Red fish, blue fish...

Carmen Baxter

Writing as Carmen Baxter

phantasy

I write weird stories.