Critique The Stories & Novels, Not the Authors

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ken

Banned
Kind Benefactor
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
11,478
Reaction score
6,198
Location
AW. A very nice place!
"It was a sunny out. Delighted, John slipped on his coat and hat and went out."

Critic 1: First off, it's "sunny." So John won't be needing a coat and hat. Yeah, maybe it's still cold, but readers couldn't possibly know this from the context, w/o being telepathic. Second: opening a story with a remark about the weather is so cliche that readers will be reaching for their own hats!

This critique is not out rightly rude, but will still make the writer not only feel that their story is being critiqued but that they are, too: they weren't swift enough to realize these glaring errors. There's also no need for the rhetorical flourishes. They're entertaining, and other members may get a kick out of them, but that isn't what providing a critique is about. A critic simply wants to relay advise to a writer about how they "might" improve their story and, if possible, do so in an encouraging and supportive way:

Critic 2: You probably would want to open your story in another way, other than by a remark about the weather. "Probably," the preferred choice of words, here, because among other things it isn't necessarily the case that an opening remark about the weather wouldn't due in this story. There are no absolute rules in writing, so declarative viewpoints really don't have a place in a critique. The "First off," might also be eliminated. It is condescending and makes a writer feel like they're being scolded like a child.

In fairness, a critic doesn't want to overdo it with niceness, either, for the purpose of predisposing a writer in their favor and getting them to pay attention to what they have to say, which I think I may do myself, at times. Being nice and courteous are essential, but they should only be used to encourage a writer and not to persuade them to adopt advise.

Let the merits of the points we raise be the things that convince writers to take our advise, and if they don't do so that is not a loss, because who's to say that our advise is right? None of us have any absolute answers, as shown by all the differences in opinions we have on topics discussed on this board.
 

Karen Duvall

Chalice the Hatchet Knight
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
2,016
Reaction score
1,094
Location
Bend, OR
Website
www.karenduvall.blogspot.com
My skin must be armor plated because I found nothing at all offensive or insensitive about Crit 1. I get a dozen times worse than this from my crit group of 10 years, and I don't blink. It's content and not context that matters. As writers, we need to look beyond the personal analysis and see to the heart of the criticism. Agents and editors are far less kind. And reviewers? Yeesh. Don't get me started.

I think sensitive writers who react to criticism need to warn those who would critique them that they need gentle handling. Not sure it would work, but it's worth a try. :D
 

Bubastes

bananaed
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2006
Messages
7,394
Reaction score
2,250
Website
www.gracewen.com
I agree with Karen: I didn't see anything wrong with Crit 1. If anything, I found it more helpful than Crit 2 because it was more direct and made me think more.
 

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
"It was a sunny out. Delighted, John slipped on his coat and hat and went out."

Critic 1: First off, it's "sunny." So John won't be needing a coat and hat. Yeah, maybe it's still cold, but readers couldn't possibly know this from the context, w/o being telepathic. Second: opening a story with a remark about the weather is so cliche that readers will be reaching for their own hats!

This critique is not out rightly rude, but will still make the writer not only feel that their story is being critiqued but that they are, too: they weren't swift enough to realize these glaring errors. There's also no need for the rhetorical flourishes. They're entertaining, and other members may get a kick out of them, but that isn't what providing a critique is about. A critic simply wants to relay advise to a writer about how they "might" improve their story and, if possible, do so in an encouraging and supportive way:

Critic 2: You probably would want to open your story in another way, other than by a remark about the weather. "Probably," the preferred choice of words, here, because among other things it isn't necessarily the case that an opening remark about the weather wouldn't due in this story. There are no absolute rules in writing, so declarative viewpoints really don't have a place in a critique. The "First off," might also be eliminated. It is condescending and makes a writer feel like they're being scolded like a child.

In fairness, a critic doesn't want to overdo it with niceness, either, for the purpose of predisposing a writer in their favor and getting them to pay attention to what they have to say, which I think I may do myself, at times. Being nice and courteous are essential, but they should only be used to encourage a writer and not to persuade them to adopt advise.

Let the merits of the points we raise be the things that convince writers to take our advise, and if they don't do so that is not a loss, because who's to say that our advise is right? None of us have any absolute answers, as shown by all the differences in opinions we have on topics discussed on this board.

There's a good middleground between softer, less abrasive language and being blunt.

That said, Critic one and Critic two are both off their rockers. It's sunny where I am right now, and I'm about to put a coat AND a hat on. Because it's fucking cold.

Critiquing for logic is fine, when you're actually picking apart bad logic. But sometimes, critics really overstep their bounds. I know I have to double-check a lot of the critiques I give because I get into this mode where *EVERYTHING* I see looks wrong. I assume going into a crit that only 50% of my advice will be helpful. If I start picking at everything that ticks my radar, this number lowers. A lot.

I'll come back later and look at the document and it'll be fine - but when my proofing hat is on, I can find error in anything.
 
Last edited:

Karen Duvall

Chalice the Hatchet Knight
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
2,016
Reaction score
1,094
Location
Bend, OR
Website
www.karenduvall.blogspot.com
Critiquing for logic is fine, when you're actually picking apart bad logic. But sometimes, critics really overstep their bounds. I know I have to double-check a lot of the critiques I give because I get into this mode where *EVERYTHING* I see looks wrong. I assume going into a crit that only 50% of my advice will be helpful. If I start picking at everything that ticks my radar, this number lowers. A lot.

I'll come back later and look at the document and it'll be fine - but when my proofing hat is on, I can find error in anything.

Excellent point. Critique is definitely not for everyone. It's a tool, and if you don't know how to use it, it will screw you up big time. I've seen authors follow critique advice to the letter and totally homogenize their work to the point it becomes lifeless. So if you don't know how to work with criticism, don't ask for it. You'll only hurt yourself and your writing. IMO, of course. :)
 

Bufty

Where have the last ten years gone?
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
16,768
Reaction score
4,663
Location
Scotland
. :Shrug:Sorry.

"It was a sunny A sunny what? A sunny rainy day with holes in the clouds, perhaps? out. Delighted, John slipped on his coat and hat You mean they were lying on the floor and he tripped? and went out Fell in a heap, unconscious, perhaps?" This is rushed, friend. Take a minute to double-check what you have written as opposed to what you meant to write. Here's a hug to make up for the cold...:Hug2:

....
 

Ken

Banned
Kind Benefactor
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
11,478
Reaction score
6,198
Location
AW. A very nice place!
So if you don't know how to work with criticism, don't ask for it. You'll only hurt yourself and your writing. IMO, of course. :)

I agree with this to an extent. But it is important to bear in mind that many new writers frequent a site like this, and really aren't experienced enough to distinguish between sound advise and advise that may not be so sound. Strongly stated advise can leave a lasting impression on new authors that may led them astray for years if it isn't totally on the mark, which it never really can be. So some qualification is necessary, when stating a view.
 

NeuroFizz

The grad students did it
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
9,493
Reaction score
4,283
Location
Coastal North Carolina
I'm sorry, Ken, and I'm not trying to be rude. But there is absolultely nothing rude about that first crit. The reviewer may be wrong in the sunny/cold thing (obviously, he/she hasn't ever lived in Edmonton, where the sun coming out in Winter means it is probably headed for -40 degrees. But you are going to have to get over the idea that a comment like that comes back to the writer. It doesn't, unless the writer is so insecure that he/she can't handle the fact that his/her writing isn't as clear as thought. The critter is absolutely correct that without the context of more than sunny, it might seem to be a problem, but in this opening, the need to wear a coat gives the context that it could be a sunny, winter day. No problem. Keep in mind that critters can be wrong in what they say, or their interpretation may not be the same as the writer's. The critter is correct that it's considered cliche to open with the weather, but that doesn't mean it can't be done and done well. But take a step-back-view to see if the critters comments indicate that you have a weak opening. The specifics of the comments aren't always as important as the critter reaction. Any opening (or middle of the story writing) that makes a readers pause to consider the connections, indicates the writing isn't as clear as it could be.

I'm really sorry, but that first crit is not rude. It addresses the writing not the author. If you take crits like that and assume that this critter is telling you that you don't know crap about writing, then you have a POV problem. You can't jump into the critter's head and tell what they are thinking when they wrote it. If we are required to make sure that everytime we make a comment on an aspect of a writers post that reflects bad technique, we also have to include some phrasing to stroke the writer's ego, we are going to see a mass exodus of critters. A point-of-fact comment on a poor writing technique is one of the most valuable crits a person can offer to another. And that's all that should need to be offered.

"This opening is weak. You need to work on that."

That's valuable information for a writer. And if the writer interprets that to mean that the critter thinks the writers him/herself is a weak writer, then that writer should not post in SYW because he/she is not mature enough (writing-wise) or emotionally ready for a good break-down critique of his/her work.
 
Last edited:

Karen Duvall

Chalice the Hatchet Knight
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
2,016
Reaction score
1,094
Location
Bend, OR
Website
www.karenduvall.blogspot.com
I agree with this to an extent. But it is important to bear in mind that many new writers frequent a site like this, and really aren't experienced enough to distinguish between sound advise and advise that may not be so sound. Strongly stated advise can leave a lasting impression on new authors that may led them astray for years if it isn't totally on the mark, which it never really can be. So some qualification is necessary, when stating a view.

I hate to say it, but it could be for the best. Honestly, writing is a craft and a skill that's not for the feint of heart, especially if your goal is publication. Those looking to be published need the harsh reality, because if this kind of criticism doesn't work for them, it's best to quit now rather than set themselves up for disappointment in the future. They should write as a hobby, and get feedback from loving friends and family members.
 

Bufty

Where have the last ten years gone?
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
16,768
Reaction score
4,663
Location
Scotland
I've occasionally seen very wrong advice given here and, trust me, someone always stepped up to the plate to correct the situation.

Suggesting that whoever gives unsound advice should qualify their advice is like wishing for the moon to turn green.

I agree with this to an extent. But it is important to bear in mind that many new writers frequent a site like this, and really aren't experienced enough to distinguish between sound advise and advise that may not be so sound. Strongly stated advise can leave a lasting impression on new authors that may led them astray for years if it isn't totally on the mark, which it never really can be. So some qualification is necessary, when stating a view.
 
Last edited:

IceCreamEmpress

Hapless Virago
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
6,449
Reaction score
1,321
Ken, I have no idea what you're getting at.

The first critique is perhaps a bit blunt, but one of the key skills one needs to learn when learning to write is learning to listen to criticism, evaluate it for its accuracy, take what you need, and discard the rest.

Anyone who thought that that first critique was "a personal attack" needs some skin-thickener, stat.
 

Bufty

Where have the last ten years gone?
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
16,768
Reaction score
4,663
Location
Scotland
Shan't listen. Shan't. Shan't. (Covers ears and skips off..)

...quit reading your post at this classic, telltale opening, to posts, which cue one in to the fact that most everything to follow will be exactly that ;-)
 

NeuroFizz

The grad students did it
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
9,493
Reaction score
4,283
Location
Coastal North Carolina
I was just following the advice of your first post, Ken. You can't have it both ways. And if you have the ability to read minds based on one or two words early in a statement, then you have no need to post your work for any critique since you'll know exactly what the reviewer will say ahead of time.
 
Last edited:

Bubastes

bananaed
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2006
Messages
7,394
Reaction score
2,250
Website
www.gracewen.com
I agree with this to an extent. But it is important to bear in mind that many new writers frequent a site like this, and really aren't experienced enough to distinguish between sound advise and advise that may not be so sound. Strongly stated advise can leave a lasting impression on new authors that may led them astray for years if it isn't totally on the mark, which it never really can be. So some qualification is necessary, when stating a view.

Ok, let me come at this from a different angle.

When I was a teenager, I trained to be a classical musician. The critiques I received were blunt (more like brutal!), harsh, and absolutely essential for my growth. If I could handle that sort of thing as a teenager, I'm sure adult writers can handle it as well. And if they can't, then they should either learn how to handle critiques better or rethink writing professionally. The entire focus should be making the WRITING the best it can be. All that ego-related stuff only gets in the way. I consider myself a servant to the story, and that means setting my insecurities aside and doing everything I can to make the story shine.

Once someone decides to shoot for excellence in any creative endeavor, it's essential to lose the ego. Every ounce of energy spent dealing with personal ego issues is energy taken away from the endeavor. Every person gets to choose where to direct that energy and reap the benefits (or not) accordingly.

ETA: my "energy management" view extends to pretty much everything in my life. If I spend energy engaged in workplace drama, for example, that's less energy for my writing, so I don't engage. Another writing example: I don't waste time fretting over rejections. When I get one, I enter it into my tracking spreadsheet, throw away the rejection, then submit to the next market. No big deal.
 
Last edited:

nevada

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
2,590
Reaction score
697
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Suggesting that whoever gives unsound advice should qualify their advice is like wishing for the moon to turn green.

not only that, but it doesn't make any sense. The person giving unsound advice doesn't know his advice unsound otherwise he wouldn't give it.

yes, a lot of writers are new. but you know what? Writing is hard. Each word is important. If, as a critter, I'm now also going to have to turn each sentence into an affirmation of the writer it'll take me four hours to crit one paragraph.

Your heading suggests that you somehow feel that a crit is personal. It is not. If I say that a sentence is awkward or something doesn't make sense, I'm talking about the words on the paper. I don't know anything about the writer and do not judge him in anyway. (the one time i did, i deleted it.) if a writer takes a crit personally, he needs to work on getting a thicker skin. Because when he gets published, there will be people who, publically, will state that they hated the book and threw it against the wall. (ask me about the furor about Dark of Night, suz brockmann's later. it'll turn your stomach). If the writer is going to take that personally, he's never gonna get out of bed and write another word again.

So yes, crit 1 is to the point. Crit 1 is also much more useful because it highlights what's wrong with the opening, as opposed to Crit 2 which just says something's wrong. If the writer knew a) something was wrong and b) what was wrong, he wouldn't have written it. so saying something doesn't work without getting specific is useless.
 

RobJ

Banned
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
2,678
Reaction score
306
Ken, I think you're right that a critique should be of the writing, not the author, and I'm sure many - if not all - people here would agree with that. I think the examples you posted are causing the problem, and perhaps at the same time illustrating that one person's rudeness is another person's plain speaking.

Cheers,
Rob
 

Ken

Banned
Kind Benefactor
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
11,478
Reaction score
6,198
Location
AW. A very nice place!
...more than a few successful (and renowned) writers are shy and suseptible to pointed remarks...so maybe I and a few other thin-skinners here still have an outside chance of becoming published too :)
 

MetalDog

Woof!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
288
Reaction score
44
Location
Greater London
Myself, I can take the knocks. After I got a bunch of friends to read my first novel and one of them used it as a means of entertaining others by telling them how boring it was, I can take quite a lot.

However, I don't think being elephant-hided is a prerequisite for writing a good story. Not eveyone takes blunt well. We're not all good at the same things. The really nice thing about writing is that you don't have to be the cool and confident kid in class to do it.

The 'if you want to be a real writer, you'll take your lumps and like it' thing is just schoolyard stuff, isn't it? In the SYW forum it advises people to state what level of critique they want - if they ask for gentle advice, I don't see a problem with that. Once they're more confident they'll probably ask for more of a mauling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.