Critiques

The thing I look for in a critique is honesty. If the piece sucks then I want to hear that, plus some suggestions about how I can go about making it not suck.

I'm with janet, honesty. I don't need someone to tell me I have a good idea if I don't. If it's bad, please tell me so I don't waste my time, or so I can tweak the idea until I'm not wasting my time.

As for what I look for when I crit: #1- stiff dialog...I'm such a stickler for that. #2- sentence flow. This one is soooo hard to explain, because people don't take it very well when you say "this doesn't flow well." Their response is usually..."Uh, okay, well I think it does." *shrug* I don't know, some sentences can be perfectly fine, but jar my reading because they just hang up the read on syllable count/word length & placement in the paragraph. I know it's not poetry, but there's still a rhythm, imo...

Am I just nuts on that one?

Birol:
What do you look for in a critique?

Click to expand...

- Honesty - like everyone else, there's no point being told my stuff is brilliant (which it obviously is), if it actually stinks.

- Reasons - if a critiquer says they think something doesn't work, I'd like a reason for it (e.g. "It doesn't work because it contradicts something in the previous paragraph). I'm not looking for an essay - just a handy pointer that I can work from.

- Thoroughness - I'd like a critiquer to actually sit down and go through it thoroughly rather than skim-reading it. Again, I don't want a line-by-line commentary (unless they're volunteering to do one), but I need something a bit more substantial than some random comments at the end.

Birol:
What do you look at in other people's writing when you're critiquing?

Click to expand...

- Anything specific that the writer's asked me to take a look at, e.g. if they're concerned about a dialogue exchange, then I'll always focus on that.

- Consistency - this applies to tone, events and characterisation. If I think something's gone off then I'll point it out and give a means of maybe fixing it.

- Plot holes - this kind of ties in with consistency, but if I think that the author's failed to address something or there's a leap of logic required then I'll point it out.

- Poor characterisation, style or dialogue - pretty much self-explanatory.

- Grammar and spelling - goes without saying.

Birol:
Do you consider yourself good at critiquing?

Click to expand...

I don't know if I'm good, but I think I'm pretty fair in what I have to say in a critique and I usually back up what I'm saying. No one's ever told me they've been unable to use anything I've told them.

Birol:
Have you ever responded badly to a critique you have received?

Click to expand...

No. I usually get critiqued in writing groups so if I'm being told something I don't like then I'll usually go very quiet and maybe glower a bit, but I've never had a tantrum about it because I don't see the point. I do always make a note of whatever's being said about a piece of my writing (bad or good) because it always gives me something to think about - my general approach is that I might not like what someone has to say, but I will listen to it and think about it*. There've been a couple of times when I've engaged with a critiquer to explain what I was trying to do and ask what they think about an alternative, but that's always been pretty civil and useful.

MM

* Note: the only exception is if I'm in a critique group with someone who is just slagging off pieces for the sake of slagging them off. I don't listen to those people because they're not interested in helping and I'm not interested in aiding their masturbatory fantasies.

Oh, I totally missed the last question (too early). I've responded poorly to a crit before, but not in a response post. The first piece I posted on AW...The first response was a rant about how it was the biggest pos the guy had ever read and I believe the term "Rugrats orgy" was somewhere in there... Something like that. I responded with a nice thank you post, but I DIDN'T give him a rep point. I almost left AW, because I was pretty crushed. I actually almost stopped working on my novel because of it, but my husband took me to dinner and convinced me the guy was a douche.

Glad I didn't leave now. I love this place! And when I came back a couple days later other people had responded and loved it...and then the jerk was banned a few days later. Is it wrong that I rejoiced when he was banned?

So, yeah, if anyone is wondering how NOT to crit, take a look at post 2 on this link.

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68336

callalily61 said:

The best crits I've received? The ones that tear it apart and give the reasons why.

Click to expand...

These are the best. It's nice to hear that people enjoyed the story, but I want substance in a critique. General comments, such as "this section was slow," can be helpful. I should be able to figure out why that section is slow on my own. I may not, however, pick up on a character inconsistency or point of plot confusion because it all makes sense in my brain; I likely neglected to relay it properly on the page.

Even if I don't agree 100 percent with a critique that tells me why something doesn't work, it gives me fresh insight. It makes me reassess: Is this really what I want to do? Can I do it another way? Can I be more effective? How would changing this part impact what follows?

I've never shied away from rewriting scenes to see how things fall out. Sometimes it gives me better character insight. Sometimes I get an entirely new direction. Sometimes I get crap, and sometimes I get genius.

I want people to tell me what they think.

When I'm critiquing other people's work, I look for overall flow, realism in dialogue, plot holes, inconsistencies, info dumps, and show v. tell. Does the story pull me along? I'll pay attention to grammar and spelling, but I won't mark up an entire manuscript for it. I'll edit for some of it, but then point out the consistent problems and leave the rest alone.

I think I'm good at it. Opinions, however, are subjective. The feedback I've received about my feedback has been positive. I will tear a piece apart if that's what the author wants, but I always try to do so constructively. I don't critique very often because it's time consuming and I prefer to critique for people I know, who know what to expect from me. I don't want hurt feelings and tears and demoralization and all my efforts to go to waste.

One thing I do like to give - and to receive - in a crit is mention of what's working particularly well. Positions on this may vary, but I've found it can help make a critique less overwhelming if the critiquer points out "Hey, you have a great way with imagery" or something like that. We expect the bad to be pointed out, but reassurance that there are good things you don't have to fix is always nice too. At the same time, I won't mention things that don't deserve mentioning.

I haven't responded badly to a critique, but I have good-naturedly sworn at my critiquer - usually for pointing out things I was trying to avoid having to deal with (because sometimes I try to be a lazy writer). In most instances, the feedback I've gotten confirms what I already knew or suspected.

What I hope for is honesty - mostly I'm looking to make sure my story makes sense, that the plot doesn't have a hole you can drive a truck through, and to find out if my thoughts translated properly on the pages.

I want to know if the reader understands what is taking place, can "see" what I've created, and isn't confused by any actions or direction. If I had a character sit down twice, without ever standing up between - I wanna know. If the plot is laughable - I really want to know. If I missed some dialog tags and the reader can't tell who's speaking - I want to know.

But I also want to know if the reader liked the story. If the characters were interesting, if the plot was an enjoyable mystery until the resolution. If they were left wanting more or not.

I appreciate more than anything when a crit can say what's wrong, then suggest how to make it right.

As to responding to a crit - I have never said anything other than Thank You. I might occasionally ask for clarification of what was said, to find out exactly where they lost what I was hoping to say. But I have never, ever reacted badly (except to go have a good cry/rage/vent in private). Even if it's a crit I don't agree with, I appreciate that someone took the time.

As to giving crits - I suk at that. I emplode. Anything other than "That was great, I really enjoyed it" and my brain locks up. I think it's because I don't feel qualified (except as I'm typing this I'm reminded that I've been helping my mother learn how to write by fixing what she does and explaining why it needed to be changed) Go figure.

I don't critique here, but I do critique some friends and some other people on a one-on-one basis. I'm not the world's greatest, because why I can usually pinpoint a few areas for improvement and find the parts that are working (equally important FB), I often don't know how specifically to address what's going on. Also, I find I have no idea what sells. The project I got my agent with is dead, dead, dead; the vampire story I thought wouldn't sell in a zillion years is what sold. Not that marketability is the #1 thing you have to look at with fiction, but it does matter, and I'm annoyingly blind to it.

I don't go into anything I'm critiquing with the idea that I'm looking for anything specific. Different elements will jump out at me, depending on the story and the style.

I want my critiquers to be honest and thorough. If the work needs to be ripped to shreds, start tearing. However, I've had a few critiquers who would only point out the negatives, never the positives, and that's not that useful. You have to know what IS working in your story to assess how best to fix what isn't. If there are honestly no positives to call upon, then I don't need a line edit; I need the critiquer to tell me to just start over.

I've never responded badly to a critique in terms of being nasty to the critiquer. There have been times I've done some sulking in private, for sure. But I always revisit the notes a couple days later and try to reassess in a fresh frame of mind, and I usually get over myself.

Azraelsbane said:

So, yeah, if anyone is wondering how NOT to crit, take a look at post 2 on this link.

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68336

Click to expand...

I don't see much wrong with posting an opinion on a story, considering he took the time to read it, even if it's a negative one... Personally, I wouldn't mind people telling me they thought whatever I wrote was bollocks, considering that's what they really thought, of course. IMO, only helps. But then, it's not like I ever had self-confidence problems, either.

I think it would be pretty hard to become a professional writer for someone overly sensitive to some random stranger's negative opinion, nevermind a submission rejection.

Don't take this as a stab in your direction or something, by the way. I'm just saying what I think about all this stuff on a more general scale.

Koobie said:

I don't see much wrong with posting an opinion on a story, considering he took the time to read it, even if it's a negative one... Personally, I wouldn't mind people telling me they thought whatever I wrote was bollocks, considering that's what they really thought, of course. IMO, only helps. But then, it's not like I ever had self-confidence problems, either.

I think it would be pretty hard to become a professional writer for someone overly sensitive to some random stranger's negative opinion, nevermind a submission rejection.

Don't take this as a stab in your direction or something, by the way. I'm just saying what I think about all this stuff on a more general scale.

Click to expand...

I don't think there's anything wrong with posting an opinion on a story either, but when it's sniping and specifically written in a hurtful manner, sorry, I think it's bad form. I read a lot of stuff and think "Wow, you've gotta be kidding me?" but I don't post that because it's not at all helpful. Everything is in the presentation. We're writers, and as such we shouldn't be vomiting words. There's a right and a wrong way to say, "This sucks."

Also, (personal opinion here) it does help to know your lore when you post a raving response wherein you pretend to know what you're talking about...

Hm, I don't have specific things that I look for in a critique. Basically I go in with a blank slate and then I usually pick the three or four most important points I think the author could work on and improve. Usually I'm more of a big-picture person, so I don't do line-by-line crits (mostly). As for whether I'm good at it, I think you'd have to ask the critiquees. And yes I know that's not a word.

Hm, have I ever taken a critique badly? Yes, but not here. And actually, it was not a critique. I was crazy PMSing. My Russian lit professor wanted to see some of my fiction so I sent him a short story. He sent me an email that wasn't just "wow great!" but it was a very well-thought out response in FAVOR of my story. I don't know WHAT the heck I was on, but I read it totally the wrong way and I just blew up. I hit "forward" and wrote in all my nasty comments under his sentences and sent it to my friend.

Except that my friend never got my email. Then I start thinking OH CRAP, I hit REPLY! And in the meantime said friend has been good enough to point out that his email is entirely complimentary and I have come to my senses. So I end up sending the professor this nutty email to the effect of "I was out of my mind and did not respond well to your email, I may have hit reply, if so I AM SO FREAKING SORRY."

He wrote back: "Uh, I never got anything. But what I said was complimentary and I meant it." [You freak.]

Sooooo now I am very careful what I say in response to critiques.

One a barely related tangent: in my experience, all Russian lit. professors are completely off-the-charts bat-shit insane.

Koobie said:

One a barely related tangent: in my experience, all Russian lit. professors are completely off-the-charts bat-shit insane.

Click to expand...

Totally agree, and German ones are not much different.

The first time I was ever critiqued on my novel, or anything like it was also the first meeting of my critique group.

They were right about 90% of what they said. I disagreed with the 10% that was left, but have found that much of it was from not knowing the rest of the story as I do. It's stuff that needs to be there for continuity, so they were asking the right questions. That's still good critique. Letting me know that the reader is asking the question they should be asking, or that I want them to ask, is good. Letting me know that they're asking the wrong question is even more important if that is the case.

The problem was that they were SO excited to be there and be part of a critiqueing group that they were a little overzealous. None of it was mean. But the eighth time I heard the same critique comment was rough. It didn't just happen once, it happened all night. It was not easy to listen to. What should have been a small comment by one and then on to the next turned into not just beating a dead horse, but throwing gasoline on it and lighting it on fire. My best friend had gone with me to the meeting, and I had to ask her to stop talking about my novel on the ride home because I was almost in tears.

After I'd had a week to let it all soak in, I realized that the problem wasn't that I was right or wrong, or that they were, it was that we were all getting used to each other in a new group. I realized I'd been brave enough to put my stuff up first, and that we'd all learn from doing rather than instinctively knowing how to critique. My stuff didn't suck; in fact, they'd really liked it and had been really excited to talk about it.

We've put some safeguards in place to have any member stop a discussion when it gets beat over the head of the person who's done the writing. And their input has been invaluable.

When I critique, I do a lot of line editing and stripping, even in my own work. I have a tendency to use more modifiers than necessary, so I'm always on the lookout for it when I critique others. I also look for consistency in plot, tense, and character. I always try to find the one thing (or more) in the selection I'm reading to praise. The best praise for me to give is when I've put down my editing pen because I'm lost in the story. I look forward to those moments.

Koobie said:

One a barely related tangent: in my experience, all Russian lit. professors are completely off-the-charts bat-shit insane.

Click to expand...

If I didn't think he was insane, does that make me insane too? He was my favorite prof in college. Awesome guy, I still keep in touch now and then.

Russian writers, on the other hand...

Giving critiques: I don't want to see your first draft or second draft. I want you to reach the point where you think it's ready for public consumption. That way, I can concentrate on characters, plot, etc and not on "there vs their" and typos. This is one of my major pet peeves. A good critique cannot be replaced by a spellchecker.

Getting critiques: You will never see the first two or three drafts of my work. When you see it, I think it's ready to be sent to a publisher. I want to know if I'm wrong. Be honest: show me plot problems, bad dialogue, confusing sentences. If a joke is just stupid instead of funny -- tell me! A critique that only says "the story is great! Keep up the good work!" is as useless as one that says "Your work sucks! Don't quit your day job! Love, Mom."

I used to do lots of critiques on writing.com but I've dropped almost to none due to the problems above. I love giving good critique, but it's frustrating when the writer sends me a note back says "thanks for the info, but it's only a first draft so I'm not sure where I'm going with it yet." Aaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

I like to see two things in a crit:
1) the opinion of the critter as a reader; did they like it, or did it "not work for me" (to use a phrase I see all the time, which I take to be a very nice way of saying "I didn't like it")
2) the opinion of the critter as a writer; point out the POV problems, the awkward wording, the lack of flow, the grammar and punctuation problems; whatever they think should be changed to make it technically better. Suggestions are a plus!

As an example, one of the crits I received which I think was absolutely great said (paraphrased) that the subject matter just completely turned her off, but the writing was good enought that she felt she had to respond with a few comments and put aside her political views, and then she followed with some very good specific comments.

Like everyone else, I appreciate honesty. I can say that because I don't think I've ever had anyone tell me my masterpiece just plain stinks and I shouldn't even be allowed in the same room as any form of writing utensil, although this might be more of an indication of the quality of people critting on this board than on the quality of my work).

Have I ever reacted badly to a crit? Certainly, but not in a retaliative manner. I appreciate it that people take the time to respond, and I try to remember to thank them with a rep point or a thank-you post.

Am I a good critter? I don't know; I only know I'm honest about whatever I say. I tend to look at clarity, logical flow, and grammar, and make sure it's obvious that all comments are my own opinion.

JoNightshade said:

Russian writers, on the other hand...

Click to expand...

Yes. My friends think I'm crazy too.
(I'm a Russian citizen by birth)

ajkjd01 said:

After I'd had a week to let it all soak in, I realized that the problem wasn't that I was right or wrong, or that they were, it was that we were all getting used to each other in a new group. I realized I'd been brave enough to put my stuff up first, and that we'd all learn from doing rather than instinctively knowing how to critique. My stuff didn't suck; in fact, they'd really liked it and had been really excited to talk about it.

Click to expand...

This is important: knowing your own work and having a certain level of confidence in it. If you're completely insecure, no amount of feedback is ever going to be well taken if it's not exactly what you want to hear. If you have confidence in your abilities, you can pick through a critique and pull from it what you need. If you're over-confident, well, what are you getting a critique for? You're perfect already and no one will ever properly appreciate the full extent of your fabulousity!

One of my favorite critiquers was a published author who told me that beginning writers always start their book in a train, plane or automobile, or waking from a dream, or with a flashback.

I like to get suggestions from people who critique my writing.

When I do a critique, I usually point out everything that hangs me up as a reader, including punctuation, spelling, grammar and everything to do with how the story is being told. I rarely praise the writing except at the beginning and the end, unless something really jumps out as being exceptional.

Also, I always point out that I'm not the world's biggest expert on the above, so the writer needs to consult a manual of style, dictionary, and so forth, to see if they want to make any changes.

I think I'm a good critiquer. Most of the last few people I've beta-read for have gotten published. Two have fulls with an agent/editor.

I want to see what doesn't work for you as a reader and why.

As I mentioned elsewhere, I take the position the critiquer is always right. Whatever they say about my writing is what they got from it. It may not have been what I wanted them to get, or what I expected them to get, but it's what they got. It lets me see how effectively I'm communicating my ideas and where I'm on or off track. I don't always agree with specific suggestions on how to fix a problem, that may need to take something into account that they don't know about.

When I critique, I tend to focus more on the writing than the story; especially when I'm only given an excerpt. Also, there are a number of writers here who write in aspects of genres, even my genres, that I'm not enthralled by. Just because I'm not fond of a particular subgenre, or some of the tropes a writer employs doesn't mean I should judge the story by my preferences.