# responding to criticism



## topcol (Jan 24, 2018)

I recently received several critiques from different WF members about a short story I wrote. All but one liked the story and gave me constructive criticism where it was needed. I followed the advice in said critiques and the response to the changes made me see that the criticism was well-founded. 

The single negative was extremely long and difficult to follow at times, it also included two errors which I explained in my response to said critic. 

At the time, I believed that I was in the position of a tyro being admonished by a master of the craft. I was very much chastened by the critique's content especially as it was not only patronising in tone but also employed sarcasm, not a very helpful method of encouraging  aspiring writers to improve.
However, today I read a series of critiques by WF members about a piece written by my one negative critic. The critics in question are clearly much more experienced writers and I have taken note of said critiques to guide my own development as a writer.

I'd like to say to others like me that it is well worthwhile checking out the efforts of those who offer such unfairly negative critiques because you may find that they too have a lot to learn about writing as an art.

topcol


----------



## Pete_C (Jan 24, 2018)

Topcol, I know what you're talking about and it's a seemingly regular occurrence in the WF prose sections. I once explained it to someone else like this. For some people the interweb is a place where they can indulge in delusions and dreams. They claim to possess the only true knowledge, in this case about writing, and then talk down to others about how poorly they write, adding a condescending note that if the writer swallowed down their snake oil then one day they'll maybe be fit to lace the crticiser's boots for them. It's all about raising their ego by depressing the writer's hopes. Take away their delusions and dreams and you're left with an old man, sad and lonely, sat at a laptop in their underwear!

Some people buy into it and follow the formulaic processes being presented (and in turn usually destroy the creativity in their work) and others see right through it. So why do some think of it as great advice? Well, the core of what is being dispensed as ultimate wisdom is basic writing foundation. If a writer is bad, the advice will make them better. It won't make their writing good or even great, but it will make it mediocre to acceptable. Anything that is formulaic will never be creative, original or outstanding. It's also easy to justify the formulaic approach because you can point to examples of it in all literature. However, you can also find full stops in all literature but that punctuation mark alone does not make a great read!

Sadly, whilst condoned by many at WF, I think the individual in question should be dealt with because they do put off new writers and crush enthusiasm, typically to build their own brand as a writing expert. Interestingly, as you have observed, the quality of their own work does seem to indicate that the formula alone does not make for good reading.

If this were my forum, the individual in question would be dealt with. He's not outrightly offensive nor is he aggressive or badly behaved, but he is self-serving and issues advice that is not only wrong but also based on little more than the sort of advice handed out on cheap correspondence courses. It's often an exercise in promoting his own work or blog or friends or ego. He did the same to me, probably because I don't talk about what I do in writing or publishing on here. I just laughed because the comments were preposterous. I have challenged his opinions on a few other threads but I don't receive replies.

Topcol, the most important thing is that you learn to write your way. Listen to what people have to say, but be prepared to ignore or even question any advice (including what I'm saying here). If you want to be creative, original or outstanding, you're going to have to do something that is non-formulaic. Trust your writer's instinct. You'll know when things are right or wrong. It takes time, practice and experience, but every step takes you closer to that final goal. For example, for me the Anniversary piece wasn't great, but it lost an original tone when you reworked it. Never mistake mass acceptance for a sign that something is good!

The world is filled with people who build themselves up (in their own delusional minds) by trampling on others. In the UK we have a word for such people, that is somewhat similar to the name of the county you live in!


----------



## sas (Jan 24, 2018)

topcol,

The single negative critique made you want to give up writing? 
Hmmm.


----------



## bdcharles (Jan 24, 2018)

Pete_C said:


> Sadly, whilst condoned by many at WF, I think the individual in question should be dealt with because they do put off new writers and crush enthusiasm, typically to build their own brand as a writing expert. Interestingly, as you have observed, the quality of their own work does seem to indicate that the formula alone does not make for good reading!



But in this instance the negative critique and the follow on comments all conspired, in the end, to help out the OP and - topcol, jump in if I'm misrepresenting - crystallised your vision and made it stronger. I see what you are saying, Pete, but I think the solution is not to remove any sort of scathing crit but to counterbalance it with our own, to provide a broad spectrum to choose from, to show the writer some other reactions in the face of such a crit. Otherwise the risk is echo-chamberism. Writing is a slog, and a good book is hard won.


----------



## SueC (Jan 24, 2018)

topcol, it stings like the devil, doesn't it? And sometimes, they don't even get what you are trying to say. I know; I think we have all had that one moment where someone we felt was better at this craft we love to do, dissed our work. Well, you are in good company! And don't you dare think of leaving here or leaving writing. I don't even like the word 'critique' because it has a negative connotation to it. But here's the deal - take what you need from anyone who voices their opinion and leave the rest. Because of well-worded critiques I am aware of the fact that my sentences are often way too long (thank you semi-colon), that I can go on and on about something that may seem irrelevant to the story at hand, and I am comma-happy. LOL. Sometimes I write like I talk, with lots of pauses, which require lots of commas - or so I think. My point is, its not that your critiquers are wrong in their observations, it may just be that they are having an off day and not doing the best job of being supportive and encouraging. I had one of those day myself, and set myself to right because the wonderful people here were not willing to see me go down the tubes. I love your writing, so keep on. Please.


----------



## Terry D (Jan 24, 2018)

To grow as a writer you need a thick skin and a well functioning internal radar. The thick skin helps to avoid bruises caused by the stones thrown by dunderheads (as well as the slight nicks and cuts from the instruments used by well meaning critics), and the radar is what you use to find the nuggets you can collect and save. If you've spent much time reading you have built a database inside your head of 'things that work' even though you might not yet know how to tap into that store of knowledge. When a bit of advice, or even sharp criticism, feels right, when you say to yourself, "I can see that." then that advice is meshing with the data you have stored -- that's the stuff that will help you. If it doesn't sound right, disregard it.


----------



## andrewclunn (Jan 24, 2018)

I'm sorry, but this topic is not clearly worded, and the OP rambles on far to much.  3 / 10  :icon_joker:


----------



## Theglasshouse (Jan 24, 2018)

Silence is the hardest of all criticism of all to accept or receive. Even people being dishonest. You don't improve that way. I guess encouragement is important. In my case. I gave my own criticism none of it harsh, and hope still that someone can provide comments. More or less I am in the same situation as you. Yet my hardships faced by English I try to correct. I know English convinces people to read a work and make it presentable. I am confused as to why people sometimes don't have time to help. I must have critiqued 5 stories. Not including one I volunteered to do by a pm. That person faces a lot of hardship so I had decided on helping him.


----------



## sas (Jan 24, 2018)

Theglasshouse said:


> Silence is the hardest of all criticism of all to accept or receive. Even people being dishonest. You don't improve that way. I guess encouragement is important. In my case. I gave my own criticism none of it harsh, and hope still that someone can provide comments. More or less I am in the same situation as you. Yet my hardships faced by english I try to correct. I know english convinces people to read a work and make it presentable. I am confused as to why people sometimes dont have time to help. I must have critiqued 5 stories.



Yes. Silence is worse.


----------



## Phil Istine (Jan 24, 2018)

topcol said:


> I recently received several critiques from different WF members about a short story I wrote. All but one liked the story and gave me constructive criticism where it was needed. I followed the advice in said critiques and the response to the changes made me see that the criticism was well-founded.
> 
> The single negative was extremely long and difficult to follow at times, it also included two errors which I explained in my response to said critic.
> 
> ...



I don't actually view critique as being positive or negative.

Some critique focusses on any perceived flaws in a piece.  Other critique may be more nurturing and fluffy.

The critique that I value the most tries to strike some kind of balance and is honest - and is the type I try to give.

I don't critique poetry as much because, in spite of my efforts, there are many poems that whoosh right over my head.  Saying "lost, bewildered, confused" a lot of the time makes for poor critique, so I stick with poems that I think I understand.

I don't believe in being fluffy as it does no-one any favours.  Nor does tearing work down while giving what appear to be canned responses.  However, tailoring suggestions for improvement to each individual piece is highly valuable.

Recently, I've started leaning towards being more formulaic with my writing.  I don't like it.  I feel stifled.  So now I'm starting to tread a path between formula and (hopefully!) flair.

What I would say is no writer receives one-hundred per cent approval.  I'm not a believer, but even God didn't manage that with his/her/its Bible.


----------



## Sam (Jan 24, 2018)

If a negative critique has that affect on you, so much so that you quit, you didn't want to be a writer. 

No amount of negativity should ever make anyone quit writing if they're determined to do it.


----------



## sas (Jan 24, 2018)

I am always shocked that wordsmiths do not know definition of critique. It does not have a negative connotation to me. It can contain both positives and negatives, or just one. My partner will attest that I am more of a weed puller than a picker of flowers. I've learned to carefully select those whose work I comment upon because I focus on weeds, and I need a planter (poet) with a strong back. At my age, my time has become extremely valuable, so I don't use it to just applaud another's flowers, no matter how pretty. But, I do give to others, always have. And, not one liner, worthless platitudes.


----------



## Darkkin (Jan 24, 2018)

I once received a 15,000 word critique on a poem , detailing how and why every word in every line, of each stanza was wrong per the reader's opinion and was then provided with a detailed outline of exactly how my poem, a tercet rhyme, was supposed to be written as modern free verse with encompassing metaphors.  And yes, this 'critiquer' kept track of their word count...According to the aforementioned critiquer, every thought, each word I tried to write was wrong because my language skills were wired wrong, so therefor, I could not possibly be a viable writer if I did not follow their process to the letter, as it would cure, my 'diseased' writing.  :encouragement:

Those 15,000 words were among the finest examples of flaming bullshit I have ever happened across.  As such, that critique was read aloud in front of one of my regular critique groups.  People were laughing to the point of tears, when it was presented for the farce it was.

- D.


----------



## topcol (Jan 24, 2018)

Sas, Hi. I actually commented "This single negative critique went some way towards provoking me not only to quit WF but also to give up writing." so it didn't make me want to give up writing.

I am not disrespecting or belittling your chosen art form, believe me. My point in posting the comment was to advise other beginners like me to do exactly what I said in the post. I thought I made that clear.

I have now edited out that comment. Thank you for drawing my attention to it.

topcol


----------



## topcol (Jan 24, 2018)

Sam, hi.

 I actually commented "This single negative critique went some way towards provoking me not only to quit WF but also to give up writing." so it didn't make me want to give up writing.

I am not disrespecting or belittling your chosen art form, believe me. My point in posting the comment was to advise other beginners like me to do exactly what I said in the post. I thought I made that clear.

I have now edited out that comment. Thank you for drawing my attention to it.

topcol


----------



## Jack of all trades (Jan 24, 2018)

Topcol, you handled the situation the way ALL critiques should be handled.

And never be afraid to admit when a crit makes you consider quitting. We've all been there at times, for moments, or hours, days, weeks, months, or even years. And it has NOTHING to do with the desire to write, or how strong it is. It has everything to do with how strong the voice of doubt is speaking, telling you nothing will come of this, and all the effort is wasted. 

To make you feel better, some of those telling you to have thicker skin have shown their own thin skin at times, as have I. Don't let it get you down. It's part of the journey. 

Writing is an art, which means it is subjective. An egotistical fool can trash anyone's writing and not be "wrong", because there is no "wrong". There is marketable and not marketable, but even that's debatable, because of the subjective nature of art.

So. You did the right thing by doing more research, before deciding to chuck writing. 

When you get a critique, or even before posting a piece, take a look at what members have written themselves or their critiques. If their writing seems to you to be a pile of manure, it's probably best to shrug off comments made by those individuals, lest they influence you to produce manure as well. If there's no examples of their own work, look at their critiques of other members works, because it's easier to see the value when your own ego is not involved. Again, if the comments resonate with you as helpful, then give that person's comments on your works value. If the comments seem to just trash for the sake of ego boosting, it's probably best to ignore that person's comments on your works.

You can even look up members' published works, and the reviews. That's all part of the research to determine how much value to give a particular person's remarks. 

As for negative critiques, only giving negatives is either self-serving or lazy. Have I done it? Probably. But I will never justify it. Those are times when I didn't want to work hard, quite simply. But there's no rule that says everyone has to critique everything, so maybe the fact that there's a critique says the poster thinks it was worth taking the time. Or the poster was bored and there wasn't anything better to comment on. Whatever.

Over time you will either gain confidence in your abilities or quit writing/posting. It's the part of the journey no one can really help you with. It's like crossing a river on foot. Even when with others, you are still on your own and must navigate your path to the best of your ability.

Good journey!


----------



## Roac (Jan 24, 2018)

Topcol, like others have said, don’t give up. WF is an amazing community and I know, personally, I feel that I have grown as a writer by giving my opinion on stories (even if people don’t use it) but also from getting critiques/comments/concerns back on my work. I believe that most people try their hardest to provide quality advice that they hope will assist the writer in improving a story or just getting better overall as a writer. Sometimes there are nuggets of gold in the advice, while others can be piles of…well I think you know what I mean.

This is an incredibly difficult craft to do and it can hurt a lot when you work on something that you may deem even publishable, just to have it ripped to shreds in the comments. Thick skin is required. Let some critiques blow over but nourish others. A few bad eggs shouldn’t deter you. Your stories are good and fun and I have enjoyed reading them and I hope to see more. Hang in there, but most importantly, just have fun with the whole process. 

Also, I believe I know which critiques you are talking about. If I am correct, I usually scan over them to see if I can see the key words and phrases that are always used and then I chuckle to myself and move on. I wouldn’t give them much thought.


----------



## topcol (Jan 24, 2018)

SueC said:


> topcol, it stings like the devil, doesn't it? And sometimes, they don't even get what you are trying to say. I know; I think we have all had that one moment where someone we felt was better at this craft we love to do, dissed our work. Well, you are in good company! And don't you dare think of leaving here or leaving writing. I don't even like the word 'critique' because it has a negative connotation to it. But here's the deal - take what you need from anyone who voices their opinion and leave the rest. Because of well-worded critiques I am aware of the fact that my sentences are often way too long (thank you semi-colon), that I can go on and on about something that may seem irrelevant to the story at hand, and I am comma-happy. LOL. Sometimes I write like I talk, with lots of pauses, which require lots of commas - or so I think. My point is, its not that your critiquers are wrong in their observations, it may just be that they are having an off day and not doing the best job of being supportive and encouraging. I had one of those day myself, and set myself to right because the wonderful people here were not willing to see me go down the tubes. I love your writing, so keep on. Please.



Thanks a lot, SueC, I wasn't seriously considering leaving, just a childish fit of pique from an old bugger who ought to know better, I regret to say, and I've already deleted the comment from the original post. 

In fact, I don't believe I could give up now because it's got right under my skin.

topcol


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Jan 24, 2018)

sas said:


> topcol,
> 
> The single negative critique made you want to give up writing?
> Hmmm.



It's true, though, that negative feedback hits harder than positive feedback, even if it's outweighed by the latter.  I know I have a pretty good handle on the things I do well, so when I get good feedback, it doesn't do much for me; after all, it's just telling me what I already know.  Negative feedback, however, is often things we didn't know.  Why would we leave bad content in our work if we know it's bad?

It's rare to find out your story is better than you thought it was, but very easy to learn that it's worse.



Sam said:


> If a negative critique has that affect on you, so much so that you quit, you didn't want to be a writer.
> 
> No amount of negativity should ever make anyone quit writing if they're determined to do it.



Sometimes it just hits you a lot harder than you ever expected.  When I finished the first draft of my first novel, it was the result of years of hard work.  I thought I was done.  And when I found out how much there was wrong with it, and considered the immense amount of work required to correct that...you definitely get a sense of "Then what was the point of all this?"


----------



## topcol (Jan 24, 2018)

Roac said:


> Topcol, like others have said, don’t give up. WF is an amazing community and I know, personally, I feel that I have grown as a writer by giving my opinion on stories (even if people don’t use it) but also from getting critiques/comments/concerns back on my work. I believe that most people try their hardest to provide quality advice that they hope will assist the writer in improving a story or just getting better overall as a writer. Sometimes there are nuggets of gold in the advice, while others can be piles of…well I think you know what I mean.
> 
> This is an incredibly difficult craft to do and it can hurt a lot when you work on something that you may deem even publishable, just to have it ripped to shreds in the comments. Thick skin is required. Let some critiques blow over but nourish others. A few bad eggs shouldn’t deter you. Your stories are good and fun and I have enjoyed reading them and I hope to see more. Hang in there, but most importantly, just have fun with the whole process.
> 
> Also, I believe I know which critiques you are talking about. If I am correct, I usually scan over them to see if I can see the key words and phrases that are always used and then I chuckle to myself and move on. I wouldn’t give them much thought.



Thanks a lot, Roac. I seem to have set a hare running with my post. I agree with what you said in response and I have set about growing another layer of epidermis forthwith.

topcol


----------



## Roac (Jan 24, 2018)

topcol said:


> Thanks a lot, Roac. I seem to have set a hare running with my post. I agree with what you said in response and I have set about growing another layer of epidermis forthwith.
> 
> topcol




That is fantastic about the epidermis!!! Mine is still very tender...but getting tougher with every posted story and submission. 

And this thread is great. I like seeing all the different views / opinions from everyone. I think you have hit a nerve (not completely with respect to certain individuals) but with the general theme that we have all gone / are going through. Thanks for starting it!


----------



## Jay Greenstein (Jan 24, 2018)

Pete_C said:


> Topcol, I think the individual in question should be dealt with because they do put off new writers and crush enthusiasm, typically to build their own brand as a writing expert. Interestingly, as you have observed, the quality of their own work does seem to indicate that the formula alone does not make for good reading.
> 
> If this were my forum, the individual in question would be dealt with. He's not outrightly offensive nor is he aggressive or badly behaved, but he is self-serving and issues advice that is not only wrong but also based on little more than the sort of advice handed out on cheap correspondence courses. It's often an exercise in promoting his own work or blog or friends or ego. He did the same to me, probably because I don't talk about what I do in writing or publishing on here. I just laughed because the comments were preposterous. I have challenged his opinions on a few other threads but I don't receive replies.
> 
> ...


Well, since I'm the one being discussed as if I'm not in the room, I do feel I must correct some misunderstandings:

First, I don't use sarcasm on any hopeful writer. If you see it as such, it's a misunderstanding. And as for the accusation of me being "self serving," that's a pretty far reach given how often I suggest specific resources, like given books, or sections of the library. I never give my own view on how to write, and suggestions I make are precisely what you would hear in the entry level classes on writing fiction. So if you object to the advice, that's your right. But by doing so you're not in opposition to me, but the teachers, publishers, and what has been learned about writing fiction for the page over many years. My background includes owning a manuscript critiquing service, teaching at workshops, and having talked publishers into offering me contracts a total of seven times. I've read slushpiles, and there are not a few people published today because I directed them to useful resources. That doesn't make me an expert, and I don't present myself as such, but it does make me knowledgeable as to what publishers, and readers pay to read. And as my favorite Mark Twain quote reads,“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”

You reduce the advice given in the various books and  courses on writing fiction to the generic: formulaic, and not worth knowing. But have your methods been notably successful? It would seem reasonable that if you are qualified to dismiss the wisdom of the writing professionals I point to that your success would overshadow theirs. And I say that not to any way disparage your views or your work, only to point out that a reasonability check should be done on any suggestion, yours as well as people like Swain's.

 Had you read the introduction to that Dwight Swain book I often suggest you would know that on page one he says:





> Then why do so many people find it difficult to learn to write? They fall into traps that slow them down and hold them back. Eight traps, specifically:
> 
> 1. They take an unrealistic view.
> 2. They hunt for magic secrets.
> ...



Point five directly addresses your claim thjat the book that follows will be "formulaic." It's not, and there's nothing formulaic about owning the proper tools for the job and knowing how to use them. We can put aside any tool, refuse to use any technique. But you cannot, cannot, cannot use the tool you are not aware exists. 

Writing fiction for the page is a difficult and demanding profession, and like it or not we're not taught even the basics of that in our school days. Check the CV of the top writers on the NYT list and, year after year, you'll find pretty much none of them simply sat down to write, without having done their homework. That says a lot, as does  99.9% rejection rate. We pretty much all go through the same educational system. And if our teachers knew how to write fiction that sells, as the teachers, they would be the most skilled and sell the majority of novels. They don't. Were we taught to write for publication in school most new writers would be new high school grads. But they're not. That, alone, should tell you that there's a lot more to it than sitting down at the keyboard, sincerity, dedication, and "natural talent."

And if telling the hopeful writer that simply writing won't work is discouraging, so be it, given that failing to do so pretty much ensures that they will not and cannot have a career _because they don't know how to write for publication._ You cannot discourage a real writer. That's a given and has always been so. So if by telling someone how a publisher will view their work as it stands on that day, _and how to fix that_ causes them to stop writing I have done two people a favor. First, the one who is going to waste endless nights at the keyboard, filled with frustration and never knowing why the writing doesn't work. And second—as Sol Stein noted—the editor/agents who are saved the annoyance of having to reject their work.


----------



## Darkkin (Jan 24, 2018)

I think all of us at one time or another have encountered this individual.  And it is akin to being  handed a gift you either don't want, can't stand, or don't know how to respond to...Etiquette dictates a polite response, in which case, a simple acknowlegement of their efforts is sufficent.  Nod, smile until out of eye shot, then deal with it as you see fit.  Remember that it is merely one opinion, nothing more.

The one size method is rarely effective, so don't be afraid to be chosey about which suggestions to consider.  What works with your style, what doesn't, and why.  Critique is a two way street, those on the receiving end need to use their critical thinking caps just as much as the critiquer.  And remember that critique is about the writing, never its author.

- D.


----------



## Jay Greenstein (Jan 24, 2018)

topcol said:


> I recently received several critiques from different WF members about a short story I wrote. All but one liked the story and gave me constructive criticism where it was needed. I followed the advice in said critiques and the response to the changes made me see that the criticism was well-founded.
> 
> The single negative was extremely long and difficult to follow at times, it also included two errors which I explained in my response to said critic.
> 
> ...


Several things to keep in mind when reading any critique:

• Someone who does not really know you took time they didn't have to give you, to help you become a better writer. And they did that just because you asked. You don't have to either follow the advice or agree with it. But in the many years I've been visiting such writing sites I've not found but one or two people who weren't honestly trying to help.

• You never learn anything from people who agree with you.

• Any critique is on the piece as it stands on that day. It's not a reflection on your talent, your potential, or the story, and should never be seen as such. Yes, it feels like someone just told you your favorite child is ugly, but that isn't the case, and is the reason we have to work to put that aside and accept a critique in the spirit in which it was given. In fact, the best critiques may be the hardest to accept.

• The thing to remember about a critique may not be that someone commented on a given line or issue, it's that the line _didn't do its job_. It didn't mesmerize the reader and keep them turning pages. They failed to engage, or fell out of the story—something that should _not_ have happened. What the one writing the critique sees as the problem may or may not be the actual cause as to why they stopped reading. (as Sol Stein said,              “Readers don’t notice point-of-view errors. They simply sense that the writing is bad.”). So if you can figure out why, and fix it, the comment worked. And that's your true job. You're the artist, and you have the final say as to how to fix the reason they stopped reading. It may be that you need a great knowledge of a certain writing issue. Or, it may be that a simple rephrasing is enough. But either way, the critique did its job, if you understand how to interpret it.


----------



## Pete_C (Jan 24, 2018)

Jay Greenstein said:


> The thing to remember about a critique may not be that someone commented on a given line or issue, it's that the line _didn't do its job_.



According to you, based on your self-proclaimed expertise.

Actually, a critique is no more than the opinion of one person. Use that opinion as a tool to berate people, and your own work had better be beyond reproach.


----------



## H.Brown (Jan 24, 2018)

In response to this threads title, a critique is the opinion of another person to a creative piece of work. A critique should be an honest review of the work, (imo) however it should be given in a constructive way, regardless of whether it is positive or negative. 

When responding critique the writer should take a step back from their own written work to objectively evaluate what has been said in the critique and then after review the writer must either act upon the critique given or dissregard said critique. We should all remember that everyone is different and reads the same words but gains a different view of what has been said, tothis we as writers should be respectful that another has offered their opinion.


----------



## bookmasta (Jan 24, 2018)

topcol said:


> I recently received several critiques from different WF members about a short story I wrote. All but one liked the story and gave me constructive criticism where it was needed. I followed the advice in said critiques and the response to the changes made me see that the criticism was well-founded.
> 
> The single negative was extremely long and difficult to follow at times, it also included two errors which I explained in my response to said critic.
> 
> ...



Sometimes, the perspective someone takes critiquing someone else's work can be one of severe hubris. If you ask enough people for their opinion of your work, regardless of whether they are other writers or not, you will always receive some sort of criticism or feedback that is not beneficial to you or work, and in may fact just be detrimental for whatever reason. What is key and imperative regardless is your ability to discern from the criticism and feedback you receive what is worthwhile for you and your growth as a writer.


----------



## Jay Greenstein (Jan 25, 2018)

> Actually, a critique is no more than the opinion of one person


You say that as if all critiques are equally valid, and no more than opinion. But that takes the approach:

                   “Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that_ ‘_[/FONT]_my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’[/FONT]__[FONT=&quot] _[FONT=&quot]”
  ~ Isaac Asimov

Would you, for example, say that it's no more thean the opinion of one person, were Mr. Asimov alive and critiquing the work? Are the words of  a noted teacher no more than opinion?  Would you give the same weight to a critique provided by someone who has been multiply published as one from someone unable to sell their work? A teacher and a student?

You're not taking into account that fiction writing, like nonfiction writing, and pretty much any other profession, can be caught. In fact, you and I spent twelve years, or more, of our life learning the techniques of writing reports and essays (and spent no time learning how to handle tags, dialogue, or the elements of a scene). How can you not agree that just as much knowledge is necessary for writing fiction—especially in light of a 99.9% rejection rate? They do offer four year majors in it at the universities, after all, and they are _not_ easy courses. Would you assume that a student there has nothing more valid to say than the hopeful writer who has done no research into the structure of and elements of a scene on the page?

But more to the point, denigrating _any_ critique not your own carries a risk: Suppose you're wrong, and are condemning a technique that publishers favor, and advocating one that will guarantee a rejection. If, instead of making up their own mind, and perhaps researching the subjec,t the writer takes your word, you may have have just killed the career of someone who might otherwise have achieved publication.

That's why I don't give my personal views of how to write, but stick to solidly proven advice provided by people who are known for their accomplishments. I don't often provide the actual text, but if asked, I always can. The advice such a pro gives may not be perfect. But at least it works for them, so far as the work selling.


----------



## Garvan (Jan 25, 2018)

Well... I have to thank Topcol for this topic as it was eye opening. Just like the Political Correctness thread, this one shows the true and very disturbing colours of this forum. 

I have already said that I am not going to post any of my writing in the Political Correctness thread but this one... after this thread, I need to think if this is a place I want to be at all.


----------



## Smith (Jan 25, 2018)

Garvan said:


> Well... I have to thank Topcol for this topic as it was eye opening. Just like the Political Correctness thread, this one shows the true and very disturbing colours of this forum.
> 
> I have already said that I am not going to post any of my writing in the Political Correctness thread but this one... after this thread, I need to think if this is a place I want to be at all.



I, nor anybody else, can really help you and give a decent answer if you don't share your own stance on the subject-matter. Nobody knows what you mean by "disturbing".

I would prefer to not see you go because you don't agree with what somebody said. That's a little dramatic.

---

I went through topcol's last several short-stories and I didn't see anything that I thought was out of line, but it's entirely possible that I missed something. The rule here is to critique the writing, not the person.

I mostly agree with topcol's ending sentiment. When somebody critiques your work, take the time to read something that they themselves have written, and see what others are saying about _their_ work, for no other reason than to further your own understanding. Maybe even leave some critique of your own if you feel so inclined.


----------



## Garvan (Jan 25, 2018)

Really has nothing to do with Topcols writing.... the fact that you thought that, WOW! 

Why the aggro tone? I thought that different opinions are wanted? No? Hmm... read back along this thread and maybe you will see why it isn't a shock that you can't handle and different opinion.  You are all so easily offended by a differing opinion that you even felt the need to come here and huff at me and insult me personally. How are you EVER going to give anyone a good critique if you can't even respond to me in a civilized way? 

No... giving a good critique is about more than just seeing the flaws it is about seeing the other person vision, seeing what they want to say, seeing their story and trying to help them bring that out and if none of you can even bring yourselves to respect other people enough (Just read the Political Correctness thread) to mind their feelings then how are you going to mind them enough to actually help them become better writers and help then bring their vision (not yours) into fruition? 

The answer? You can't because being a good critiquer is more than just opinions or whatever it is about respect and none of you have that.


----------



## bdcharles (Jan 25, 2018)

Garvan said:


> Really has nothing to do with Topcols writing.... the fact that you thought that, WOW!
> 
> Why the aggro tone? I thought that different opinions are wanted? No? Hmm... read back along this thread and maybe you will see why it isn't a shock that you can't handle and different opinion.  You are all so easily offended by a differing opinion that you even felt the need to come here and huff at me and insult me personally. How are you EVER going to give anyone a good critique if you can't even respond to me in a civilized way?
> 
> ...



Sorry you feel put out here. I can (and feel I ought to) assure you that many of us here are respectful and civlised(-ish). Many of us are thrusting and impetuous. Many of us are mild and considered in our responses. Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. _Vive la différence!_, as the French would have it. Please stick around and you will hopefully see that and add to it.

As for the critique, personally I struggle sometimes to see the vision of the writer, particularly if the writing quality needs work, so I can only guess at it or approach it as either straight reader or obsessive grammarian-slash-general style advisor in those instances. Often the temptation is to try and impose my own vision over the top of things, which is definitely something I have had to watch for in the past.


----------



## Smith (Jan 25, 2018)

Garvan said:


> Really has nothing to do with Topcols writing.... the fact that you thought that, WOW!



Uh, I didn't say that, or even imply that.



> Why the aggro tone? I thought that different opinions are wanted? No? Hmm... read back along this thread and maybe you will see why it isn't a shock that you can't handle and different opinion.  You are all so easily offended by a differing opinion that you even felt the need to come here and huff at me and insult me personally. How are you EVER going to give anyone a good critique if you can't even respond to me in a civilized way?



I politely ask you to re-read my post. I don't know why my post offended you, as there was nothing aggressive, insulting, or uncivil about it.



> No... giving a good critique is about more than just seeing the flaws it is about seeing the other person vision, seeing what they want to say, seeing their story and trying to help them bring that out and if none of you can even bring yourselves to respect other people enough (Just read the Political Correctness thread) to mind their feelings then how are you going to mind them enough to actually help them become better writers and help then bring their vision (not yours) into fruition?



"None of you".



> The answer? You can't because being a good critiquer is more than just opinions or whatever it is about respect and none of you have that.



I kindly advise you refrain from making sweeping, absolute statements ("none of you") in the future. I've known most of these people since I joined, and it's an unfair, inaccurate representation of some very good friends. I was only trying to get to the bottom of why you feel the way you do, on the off chance that I might be able to help, but I'll think twice about doing that from now on if you're going to get upset with me for no reason and waste my time.

I'll repeat what I said to you in my original response, Garvan: I'd rather not see you - or anybody else for that matter - leave, simply because you disagree with what a select minority of people have to say. You are not going to get along with everybody no matter where you go.

If _that_ is an aggressive, offensive, and uncivilized thing to say, then we're unfortunately through talking.


----------



## Pete_C (Jan 25, 2018)

Jay Greenstein said:


> You say that as if all critiques are equally valid, and no more than opinion. But that takes the approach:
> 
> “Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that_ ‘_[/FONT]_my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’_[FONT=&Verdana]”
> ~ Isaac Asimov



All critiques are equally valid. Does any writer stand by every bookshop, only allowing those who are in their opinion educated enough to decide whether they purchase the author's works? Every reader has an opinion; ignore those in favour of the opinions of only learned folk, and you've just disrespected the most important person in writing: the reader.

You've shown on numerous occasions that you believe your critiques to be golden, but that does little more than alienate you from others who are not blindly following a formulaic approach. You have a right to your opinion, but when you disregard others' opinions in a cloud of condescension and arrogance, and when you base your attitude on assumptions, you will find your own opinions being examined and often disregarded.



Jay Greenstein said:


> Would you, for example, say that it's no more thean the opinion of one person, were Mr. Asimov alive and critiquing the work? Are the words of  a noted teacher no more than opinion?  Would you give the same weight to a critique provided by someone who has been multiply published as one from someone unable to sell their work? A teacher and a student?



I couldn't give a toss if it was Asimov or any other. I wouldn't care if Asimov hated something I'd written, because I'm likely not writing for him. The reader, as I've said, comes first. There also has to be some distinction with regard to your inference that someone 'multiply published' _(sic) _has an opinion of more validity than anyone else. Firstly, you often make assumptions that no one else has any background in writing or publishing. Secondly, there are many writers that churn out pulp to a formula who, in my opinion, could not offer the insight of a forward-thinking reader.



Jay Greenstein said:


> You're not taking into account that fiction writing, like nonfiction writing, and pretty much any other profession, can be caught. In fact, you and I spent twelve years, or more, of our life learning the techniques of writing reports and essays (and spent no time learning how to handle tags, dialogue, or the elements of a scene). How can you not agree that just as much knowledge is necessary for writing fiction—especially in light of a 99.9% rejection rate?



Once again, an assumption that suits your agenda. In a previous post I pointed out to you that claims of schools not teaching creative writing was something of an assumption on your behalf, and a poorly made one. The fact you've ignored that and reasserted the assumption to me proves how little regard you place upon anything that refutes the falsehoods your approach is built upon. It is true that few children start life wanting to be writers, and so in school they absorb what they need for their chosen careers. However, there is plenty to learn about writing fiction. That you did not learn the lessons, or see the how to adapt what you were taught at school, does not mean the same is true for others. 



Jay Greenstein said:


> But more to the point, denigrating _any_ critique not your own carries a risk: Suppose you're wrong, and are condemning a technique that publishers favor, and advocating one that will guarantee a rejection. If, instead of making up their own mind, and perhaps researching the subjec,t the writer takes your word, you may have have just killed the career of someone who might otherwise have achieved publication.



This is interesting because reading multiple 'critiques' from you I see that you do push writers to 'take your word' and follow a formulaic approach. But do you know what publishers' favour? Do you know what makes editors' spike something? You contest that you do, but I see little evidence of it in the formulae you promote or in your own work.

The crux of the matter is this: you yourself make it difficult for people to accept your opinion and respect the time you put into critiques because they all share a similar message (almost cut-and-paste at times), they are based upon foundations of assumption, they are condescending and at times arrogant, and your own work does not seemingly illustrate the principles you espouse.

I fear that trying to request you adopt a more realistic and balanced approach will fall on deaf ears, as it has in other writing forums where you are no longer welcomed, but I would have thought history repeating itself several times might have hopefully highlighted something negative in your approach that could be corrected.


----------



## Garvan (Jan 25, 2018)

Smith said:


> Uh, I didn't say that, or even imply that.





> I went through topcol's last several short-stories and I didn't see anything that I thought was out of line, but it's entirely possible that I missed something. The rule here is to critique the writing, not the person.
> 
> I mostly agree with topcol's ending sentiment. When somebody critiques your work, take the time to read something that they themselves have written, and see what others are saying about _their work, for no other reason than to further your own understanding. Maybe even leave some critique of your own if you feel so inclined._



Unless I missed something? 



> I politely ask you to re-read my post. I don't know why my post offended you, as there was nothing aggressive, insulting, or uncivil about it.



It didn't offend me... It was just so very typical of the type of people that seem to inhabit this forum, all "free speech!" until an opinion is uttered and then it is all "Don't you say that! Prove it! Never! I object! Burn then on the fires of hell!"

You need to re-read your reply. 



> I kindly advise you refrain from making sweeping, absolute statements ("none of you") in the future. I've known most of these people since I joined, and it's an unfair, inaccurate representation of some very good friends. I was only trying to get to the bottom of why you feel the way you do, on the off chance that I might be able to help, but I'll think twice about doing that from now on if you're going to get upset with me for no reason and waste my time.I'll repeat what I said to you in my original response, Garvan: I'd rather not see you - or anybody else for that matter - leave, simply because you disagree with what a select minority of people have to say. You are not going to get along with everybody no matter where you go.
> 
> If _that_ is an aggressive, offensive, and uncivilized thing to say, then we're unfortunately through talking.



But every post in this thread is screaming "I don't give a fuck - conform, conform conform!" Simply put what I said is backed up by every word written in this thread. You are all a bunch of self satasphied writers more interested in protecting and projecting your opinions on others rather than helping new writers better themselves. 

I have been reading all the threads on this forum, reading the critiques, either there is ass kissing or you are all telling others how to write like you do and then getting massively offended with someone disagrees with you. 

You all need to grow up a little and I really don't care what you think of them. You are them so of course you don't see what is wrong. In fact you are one of the worst offenders. 

And don't try that "Oh I want you to stay" bullsit. I ain't one of the new little writers you bully - bullshit does not baffle this brain so take it else where.


----------



## Garvan (Jan 25, 2018)

bdcharles said:


> Sorry you feel put out here. I can (and feel I ought to) assure you that many of us here are respectful and civlised(-ish). Many of us are thrusting and impetuous. Many of us are mild and considered in our responses. Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. _Vive la différence!_, as the French would have it. Please stick around and you will hopefully see that and add to it.
> 
> As for the critique, personally I struggle sometimes to see the vision of the writer, particularly if the writing quality needs work, so I can only guess at it or approach it as either straight reader or obsessive grammarian-slash-general style advisor in those instances. Often the temptation is to try and impose my own vision over the top of things, which is definitely something I have had to watch for in the past.



Really no you are not. Or well.. ok you are as long as there is agreement or fear. Just take a step back. Look at some of the comments in the critique sections, the way that you guys speak to each other and how little groups have formed everywhere and how nasty it gets when anyone new comes on here. The hazing alone is shocking, let along some of the "advice" they are given. 

And sure you may try... but trying is not doing and I am sorry but trying isn't enough when you are giving career-defining advice. So either do or don't comment.


----------



## bdcharles (Jan 25, 2018)

Garvan said:


> Really no you are not. Or well.. ok you are as long as there is agreement or fear. Just take a step back. Look at some of the comments in the critique sections, the way that you guys speak to each other and how little groups have formed everywhere and how nasty it gets when anyone new comes on here. The hazing alone is shocking, let along some of the "advice" they are given.
> 
> And sure you may try... but trying is not doing and I am sorry but trying isn't enough when you are giving career-defining advice. So either do or don't comment.



I am agreeing with you! Seriously, I am. I'm just trying to diffuse this situation and am genuinely sympathising with you. I actually had this same experience in another forum recently. I went on there, posted some of my WIP and bam! Vitriolic crit one after the other. There was a right little nasty group of them, forming up. Now, my internal editor is pretty vicious so I can handle most of it but some of it was, or certainly felt, pretty personal. Fortunately I am committed enough to my WIP to be able to differentiate between the sorts of responses. And I just cracked on, as if none of it mattered. Actually, it kind of didn't.

They'll break soon teehee


----------



## Pete_C (Jan 25, 2018)

Garvan said:


> Unless I missed something?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If I were you I'd take a few moments to consider my approach and maybe act with a modicum of the maturity you claim to have.


----------



## Smith (Jan 25, 2018)

Garvan said:


> Unless I missed something?



That wasn't aimed at you. That's why I separated that part of the post with a "---".



> It didn't offend me... It was just so very typical of the type of people that seem to inhabit this forum, all "free speech!" until an opinion is uttered and then it is all "Don't you say that! Prove it! Never! I object! Burn then on the fires of hell!"



I am an advocate of free-speech, and the only thing I asked you to not say is "none of you", because it's unjustified and inaccurate. Who do you honestly think has a better idea of the nature of this forum? A person who has been here for three weeks or a person who has been here for over three years?



> But every post in this thread is screaming "I don't give a fuck - conform, conform conform!" Simply put what I said is backed up by every word written in this thread. You are all a bunch of self satasphied writers more interested in protecting and projecting your opinions on others rather than helping new writers better themselves.



This is ironic.



> I have been reading all the threads on this forum, reading the critiques, either there is ass kissing or you are all telling others how to write like you do and then getting massively offended with someone disagrees with you.



If that's your opinion, I'm sorry.



> You all need to grow up a little and I really don't care what you think of them. You are them so of course you don't see what is wrong. In fact you are one of the worst offenders.
> 
> And don't try that "Oh I want you to stay" bullsit. I ain't one of the new little writers you bully - bullshit does not baffle this brain so take it else where.



You won't have to worry about that "bullshit" anymore, because your replies have changed my mind. I couldn't care less now.

Sincerely,

-Kyle


----------



## bdcharles (Jan 25, 2018)

Please stop guys. Either get on or don't talk to one another. I'm getting bored now.

And when I'm bored I write poetry. Really, _really _bad poetry.


----------



## H.Brown (Jan 25, 2018)

​​Enough, either talk about responding to critiques in a mature manner or do not post in this thread.


----------



## Garvan (Jan 25, 2018)

bdcharles said:


> I am agreeing with you! Seriously, I am. I'm just trying to diffuse this situation and am genuinely sympathising with you. I actually had this same experience in another forum recently. I went on there, posted some of my WIP and bam! Vitriolic crit one after the other. There was a right little nasty group of them, forming up. Now, my internal editor is pretty vicious so I can handle most of it but some of it was, or certainly felt, pretty personal. Fortunately I am committed enough to my WIP to be able to differentiate between the sorts of responses. And I just cracked on, as if none of it mattered. Actually, it kind of didn't.
> 
> They'll break soon teehee



... ok, ok... I apologise! 



Pete_C said:


> If I were you I'd take a few moments to consider my approach and maybe act with a modicum of the maturity you claim to have.



Consider this the harsh critique of the forum. A wake-up call, a kick in the ass, the nuclear bomb of commentaries on social behaviour within a closed group. 

What you are hearing is my anger for the new writers that will be coming onto this forum looking for help only to get either chased away or crammed into a box in order to be accepted enough that they aren't chased off. I feel for them, I want them to do well, I want a place where they can come and actually learn. 

Do you think I don't have better things to do other than sit in front of my computer and read bad writing all day? Do you think I LIKE reading bad writing all day? Trust me I don't but I do because I truly utterly, want to see them become the next James Joyce or Anne Rice. I want to see new authors become great authors. 

So I am pissed. I admit that. I came here, a place (like so many others) who say they want to help and that this is a place for new writers... and I see this? This thread? With the utter uncaring shown? Combined with the comments from the other thread on Correctness. Boy, I am on the warpath because all I can wonder is how many poor writers have come here to this? 

How many poor people have you turned from writing? How many talented people have you ruined? There is no other word for it. Ruined is it. 



Smith said:


> I am an advocate of free-speech, and the only thing I asked you to not say is "none of you", because it's unjustified and inaccurate. Who do you honestly think has a better idea of the nature of this forum? A person who has been here for three weeks or a person who has been here for over three years?



The new person. I will always take the opinion of the new person of a forum. Like with series. I will always take the person who mentions flaws over the person who says only praise about an author or series. The person who can see the flaws but still loves the series is more honest than the one who only sees the good.


----------



## Smith (Jan 25, 2018)

Garvan said:


> The new person. I will always take the opinion of the new person of a forum. Like with series. I will always take the person who mentions flaws over the person who says only praise about an author or series. The person who can see the flaws but still loves the series is more honest than the one who only sees the good.



I don't only see the good, so I don't see how this is relevant.

The quality of feedback hasn't worsened in my experience. Majority of the people are helpful. They've all left critiques on my writing, some of them harsh, some of them not honest enough, and many in between. That's how it was in June of 2013, and that's still the way it is for me now. All that's changed are some new faces.

WF isn't perfect, but if the forum were as bad as you're making it out to be, I wouldn't be here, and I suspect a lot of other people wouldn't have stuck around, especially those who have joined in the last year or so and are still active. I don't expect people to cater to my feelings in their critique. I expect them to critique the work and not me.

Really. The audacity of your baseless assumptions truly astounds me. You've been here for about three weeks and act as if you know all that there is to know about everyone and everything.


----------



## Pete_C (Jan 25, 2018)

Garvan said:


> How many poor people have you turned from writing? How many talented people have you ruined? There is no other word for it. Ruined is it.



That's your opinion, but based upon what? I'm guessing nothing.

In my experience WF, like ALL other writing forums, has its ups and down, but the general quality of critique here is good. There are exceptions, but you have to accept exceptions from readers too. WF has some self-proclaimed experts; some are experts, some aren't. That's a bit like real life.

Making assumptions only puts your argument on a weaker footing. You've already declared you'll not be posting work here, so why not let those who do post decide for themselves whether the critiques they receive work or don't.

I have received many that were valuable and insightful. I've also had some that are not. I've given many that people say have helped. I've given some that upset people. How many writers have I ruined? I'll have to check my notes and get back to you on that.


----------



## bdcharles (Jan 25, 2018)

Pete_C said:


> That's your opinion, but based upon what? I'm guessing nothing.
> 
> In my experience WF, like ALL other writing forums, has its ups and down, but the general quality of critique here is good. There are exceptions, but you have to accept exceptions from readers too. WF has some self-proclaimed experts; some are experts, some aren't. That's a bit like real life.
> 
> ...



It'll likely be based on personal experience. I had a similar experience recently on another forum. I know what I saw, man!  I didn't even bother to raise it, didn't need anyone to agree with me. It was what it was. I just pushed on in and got posting. 

Left a bit of a taste, though, you know? But they'll come around.


----------



## Smith (Jan 25, 2018)

bdcharles said:


> It'll likely be based on personal experience. I had a similar experience recently on another forum. I know what I saw, man!  I didn't even bother to raise it, didn't need anyone to agree with me. It was what it was. I just pushed on in and got posting.
> 
> Left a bit of a taste, though, you know? But they'll come around.



I also had a similar experience. I stuck around now I have an enjoyable time there, and even have learned to get along with people who I initially got into conflict with.

Isn't this just the nature of joining any new group anywhere, ever? Sure, some are better than others, no doubt about that. But I don't think I've ever - whether it be a new team, a class, a forum, a friend-circle - gotten along with everybody perfectly all the time, or not had to do a little bit of readjusting / agreeing to disagree on topics of significant disagreement.

And while trying to be as open and welcoming as possible, no group is under an obligation to bend over backward and completely change to accommodate every new member. For one, they wouldn't be allowed to discriminate / filter. Two, it just isn't possible in reality.

And before anybody freaks out: discrimination - to note or observe a difference; distinguish accurately


----------



## bdcharles (Jan 25, 2018)

Smith said:


> Isn't this just the nature of joining any new group anywhere, ever?



Noo ... they vary greatly. Me, I reserve particular affection for the ones that worship me from the get go. Life's too short not to be venerated, eh?  Or at least give me a good long honeymoon period.

On a more serious note there are some online groups that are super welcoming. It can, I grant you, go a bit far the other way though. Swings and roundabouts and shadowy figures lurking by the fence and all that.


----------



## Smith (Jan 25, 2018)

bdcharles said:


> Noo ... they vary greatly. Me, I reserve particular affection for the ones that worship me from the get go. Life's too short not to be venerated, eh?  Or at least give me a good long honeymoon period.
> 
> On a more serious note there are some online groups that are super welcoming. It can, I grant you, go a bit far the other way though. Swings and roundabouts and shadowy figures lurking by the fence and all that.



The overly welcoming groups, besides being creepy, tend to reveal themselves to be dishonest and fake *in my experience*. Not always; some of them are full of legitimately, wonderful people (I'm part of one)! But on the whole - in my personal experience - you find out that for one reason or another, the people there have two different faces.


----------



## Garvan (Jan 25, 2018)

I have said what needed to be said. Now people CAN make a choice because one can never make any decision without all of the facts.


----------



## Bayview (Jan 25, 2018)

Jay Greenstein said:


> Would you, for example, say that it's no more thean the opinion of one person, were Mr. Asimov alive and critiquing the work? Are the words of  a noted teacher no more than opinion?  Would you give the same weight to a critique provided by someone who has been multiply published as one from someone unable to sell their work? A teacher and a student?



Is Isaac Asimov here? Are any of the great teachers here? If they were, we'd have an interesting experience, absolutely, but as they aren't...

We should be careful about giving ourselves false authority. You've read some stuff about writing, and that's great, but lots of other people here have read lots of stuff about writing, as well. Your immortal hero Dwight argues against looking for a formula or one precise "right way" to write, but your posts very often give the impression that there's only one right way (and only you know it).

Being published doesn't mean much. I've had loads of books published and about all I can say is that I've gotten better at _my_ writing. But my writing isn't the same as someone else's. Different goals, different genres, different styles, different approaches to it all. I'm in no way an authority, and when I critique I do it as a reader (this worked for me, this didn't work for me).



> That's why I don't give my personal views of how to write, but stick to solidly proven advice provided by people who are known for their accomplishments. I don't often provide the actual text, but if asked, I always can. The advice such a pro gives may not be perfect. But at least it works for them, so far as the work selling.



There are two problems with this approach... one, you've filtered the advice of the "experts" through yourself, and as such you really seem to have twisted quite a bit of it around into something it was never meant to be. When I've read Dwight Swain I've pulled out very different things that what you've pulled out: who's to say which of us is right?

Second, related but not identical... you still have to _apply_ your master's teachings to other people's work, and this is far from simple. This isn't math. We can't look at the answer book and say, "Oh, no, you're wrong, you said twelve and the answer is seventeen. Let's see where you went wrong." It's writing. It's subjective. Dwight may say each character should have a "dominant impression", but who's to say whether a given piece has achieved that goal? What may be vivid to one reader may not come across clearly to another reader. What one reader may find sufficiently clear may feel over-done and tedious to another. Once we're past basics of grammar and mechanics, there's no right or wrong to writing. There's only more effective and less effective, and this will vary greatly from reader to reader.

So of course we can try to improve our writing and make it more effective to more people, and critique can certainly be a valuable part of that process. But for a healthy critique culture, I think the authors need to recognize that they're going to be getting a variety of opinions, all of which should be considered but none of which should be treated as gospel; _and_ I think the critiquers need to to recognize that their critiques are only opinions and are a hell of a long way from gospel. If there's an issue on either side of that balance, I think the critique culture can be pretty frustrating, or even destructive.





On a related note, I was just reading the Ursula Le Guin thread. She's an acknowledged master, right? Someone we should listen to since she's multi-published, award-winning, revered, etc.? She says:

"Inexperienced writers tend to seek the recipes for writing well. You buy the cookbook, you take the list of ingredients, you follow the directions, and behold! A masterpiece! The Never-Falling Soufflé!

Wouldn’t it be nice? But alas, there are no recipes. We have no Julia Child. Successful professional writers are not withholding mysterious secrets from eager beginners. The only way anybody ever learns to write well is by trying to write well. "

and

"There are “secrets” to making a story work — but they apply only to that particular writer and that particular story."


----------



## RhythmOvPain (Jan 25, 2018)

Smith said:


> I don't only see the good, so I don't see how this is relevant.
> 
> The quality of feedback hasn't worsened in my experience. Majority of the people are helpful. They've all left critiques on my writing, some of them harsh, some of them not honest enough, and many in between. That's how it was in June of 2013, and that's still the way it is for me now. All that's changed are some new faces.
> 
> ...



I just met him and I know I don't like him.

I'm not gonna attack him until he says something else fly to me.

That said, I'm not going to go out of my way to start animosity.

I'd much rather play the role of closer.

No one should go out of their way to be insipid or rude; doing so is a personal attack and can be construed as a childish act of foolishness.

More to the point, if all it takes to get your rocks off is to insult someone on face value, you're probably an asshole anyway and just want everyone to know.


----------



## Firemajic (Jan 25, 2018)

topcol said:


> I recently received several critiques from different WF members about a short story I wrote
> 
> .{ All but one liked the story and gave me {{{{constructive criticism where it was needed}}}. I followed the advice in said critiques and the response to the changes made me see that the criticism was well-founded. }This is EXACTLY what a GOOD critique should do...It should bring into focus any rough spots....
> 
> ...




I really believe the REAL issue is "Responding to BAD critique....  ANY comments/ critique that is condescending/ chastising/ belittling/ sarcastic/ patronizing in tone or attitude will NEVER be helpful... it is a normal reaction to become defensive when someone comes at you with that attitude, THAT person, who uses sarcasm, or any of the things mentioned above, is not trying to help you. They have a DIFFERENT agenda.... as writers, we KNOW how to use words to evoke certain emotions and reactions.... that's what we do..... so, there is NO excuse. NONE! The INTENT should be obvious.... do NOT respond! Report it and move on...As writers... we should be better than that. As members of this writing forum... we ARE better than that kind of behavior....


----------



## Smith (Jan 25, 2018)

Firemajic said:


> I really believe the REAL issue is "Responding to BAD critique....  ANY comments/ critique that is condescending/ chastising/ belittling/ sarcastic/ patronizing in tone or attitude will NEVER be helpful... it is a normal reaction to become defensive when someone comes at you with that attitude, THAT person, who uses sarcasm, or any of the things mentioned above, is not trying to help you. They have a DIFFERENT agenda.... as writers, we KNOW how to use words to evoke certain emotions and reactions.... that's what we do..... so, there is NO excuse. NONE! The INTENT should be obvious.... do NOT respond! Report it and move on...As writers... we should be better than that. As members of this writing forum... we ARE better than that kind of behavior....



I might add to your response, Jul, that we can follow the good examples set by you and others as to the kind of culture we'd like to cultivate in the workshop areas of the forum, assuming anybody is wondering what constitutes as constructive criticism.


----------



## Birb (Jan 25, 2018)

I think that, as proven by some of the earlier posts in this thread, every reader and critiquer has a differing opinion. I know that negative critiques like the one you originally posted about suck, but they're also incredibly necessary. Reading negative reviews, even if the reviews are somewhat suckish themselves, almost give you a grounding to reality. There is no such thing as a perfect story, but striving for perfection is what makes things great, that's the way I like to think about it anyways.

Besides, you never grow without breaking a little bit beforehand to make room for the new stuff.

Good luck with your future writings!


----------



## escorial (Jan 25, 2018)

WF is for me the most allrounded site on the net..an Firemajic reply just sums up the people on here..
Quality stuff


----------



## Darkkin (Jan 25, 2018)

Has anyone noticed how everyone has an opinion on how one should respond to critique and rushes to discuss the proper way to respond, but those affected by harsh critique seldom attempt to discuss such critiques with a critiquer.  Writers, remember that we are readers, too.  Critical thinking caps required.  Standard literary discussion, a two way street.  As writers, if we have qualms about a critique, stand up and say something.  Ask for clarification, quantification, examples.

Someone says, you need to write piece X this way:  A line with a rhythm, maybe a repeat.  That would make it sound right.

If an example is not included or provided by way of a reply...How much consideration should be given to the critique?  Writers just like the readers need to remain objective, never an easy undertaking given the personal commitment takes, but it is a requisite skill needed to succeed in the crafts.

Look at writing as if you are adopting a puppy.  Yeah!  It is cute and fluffy and fun...And then the work begins.  Puppy needs training (no is a word that becomes a refrain), (basic classes), exercise (committed block of time and attention), health maintainence (writing groups, classes, forums, critiques).   Set a routine, ask questions, and work with what you have, be prepared to adapt.  Make note of what works, what doesn't, and most importantly consider why.  With time and proper attention a puppy becomes a dog that will do just about anything its owner will ask of it.  It becomes a companion, a best friend...Mine saved my life.

Writing when provided with proper, sometimes practical, care and guidence it becomes a skill that like a good dog, has a multitude of roles and uses.  If left to its own devices...Well, destructive habits can form.

- D.


----------



## Jay Greenstein (Jan 25, 2018)

Pete_C said:


> All critiques are equally valid. Does any writer stand by every bookshop, only allowing those who are in their opinion educated enough to decide whether they purchase the author's works? Every reader has an opinion;


 That's like saying that mashed potatoes have no bones. It's true, but so what? The opinions of successful writers in how to approach the act of presenting a story on the page ar a lot more likely to be accurate than those of someone who, yesterday said, "I think I'll write a story."

If your goal is to learn to write. and the only writing skills you own are the nonfiction skills our schooldays impart, opinion is useless. Facts, knowledge, and technique, the tools of our profession, are necessary. That acquiring editor or agent you submit to has a thousand submissions on his/her desk for every one that gets a yes—one hundred for everyone who gets a "send more so I can look at it," letter. Your competition for that single publishing slot includes previously published writers. It includes people who have spent a decade or more honing their skills. Simply sitting down and hoping that a magical must will make your writing entice that editor is not the best way to get there.

There are people who make their living by successfully judging what people will buy. You think they're just giving an opinion? Let's say it is. If you don't take _their _"opinions" into account when writing and submitting your work you're wasting the time to submit because that's a guaranteed rejection. And that is _not_ my opinion, it's the result of conversations with such agents as Donald Maass and Noah Lukeman, writers like Jennie Cruisie, and Hal Clement (he was still hitting the convention circuit in 1997 and critiquing, there, when I had the honor to sit with him on a panel. He was amazing).

It is useful to have people read and comment, of all kinds. No one disputes that. But over the years I've learned that if your work is critiqued (and a critique is _not_ a review) by someone who writes with greater skill the advice is useful. But if the one doing it has less skill the suggestions they make reflect how _they_ would write it, and often will be sincerely offered misinformation, which is why I so often to say to go to the pros.

I began writing my articles for the newsletters of one of my publishers, but they're meant to identify problems that may need addressing, not teach you to write, which is why I always include a disclaimer saying they're not meant to teach writing, and to go to the pros for reliable information.



> You've shown on numerous occasions that you believe your critiques to be golden, but that does little more than alienate you from others who are not blindly following a formulaic approach.


Obviously, you dislike me enough to ignore the TOS rule about talking about the messenger instead of the message. You can feel any way you care to about me. I'm fine with that, and bear you no ill will. But this is a discussion of critiquing, not critiquers,, and, someone else's thread. Not a good place place for personal animosity.

But that aside. I believe my critiques to be accurate (as I'm sure you do yours), because they are directly based on the advice of teachers, publishers, and professional writers. And, I give the reasons _why_ I say the things I do, link to articles directly related, and suggest highly rated books on the subject of writing fiction, so those I critique can see how the publishing industry views the points I raise. If you're going to find fault with the teachings of Dwight Swain, Jack Bickham, Debra Dixon, Sol Stein, Donald Mass, and the others whose views I pass on, why not take a look at them directly? You may be surprised at how useful their views are.





> You have a right to your opinion, but when you disregard others' opinions in a cloud of condescension and arrogance, and when you base your attitude on assumptions, you will find your own opinions being examined and often disregarded.


 It appears that you're saying that where the advice I give disagrees with your views I should defer to you, and thank you for having pointed out the error of my ways. But given my choice between that and passing on what the pros say...





> The reader, as I've said, comes first.


 Think about it. That reader has been looking, exclusively, at professionally written and prepared work for their entire lives. So they _expect_ work to be of that quality. Like every other profession, ours is filled with tricks of the trade, specialized knowledge, and things that are obvious once pointed out, but not before. So if you are to please _that_ reader, it seems reasonable to learn the standards and techniques the publishing industry apply when accepting and preparing a manuscript. It's not secret. Publishers visit workshops and conventions, freely telling anyone who woill listan what they're seeking, and what turns them off. 





> Firstly, you often make assumptions that no one else has any background in writing or publishing.


As someone who owned a manuscript critiquing business, my job was recognizing the problems that would cause a given manuscript to be rejected. I make no assumptions because the writing speaks for itself.  What you're not taking into account is that since our teachers don't tell us that there's a different approach to presenting fiction, we universally leave school ignorant of its existence, just as I was when I decided to begin recording my campfire stories back in 1975. So almost without exception, the hopeful writer either records themself telling the story verbally, presents a list of what they see on their mental screen as they "watch" the film version, or, what amounts to a detailed history of a series of fictional events. And I saw one of those three on nearly every manuscript submitted. I see them here and on most writing sites. It isn't a matter of talent or good and bad writing, it's that we leave school with a set of writing skills inappropriate to the medium and the mission—and don't know that.





> Secondly, there are many writers that churn out pulp to a formula who, in my opinion, could not offer the insight of a forward-thinking reader.


In the early 1900's there was what was called "The poet in the garret," attitude, where a starving wannabee poet denigrated an "establishment" not "forward thinking" enough to recognize their genius. 

Seriously, what in the pluperfect hells is a "forward thinking writer?" And what uniquely qualifies you to be one? You denigrate undefined writers as beneath your notice. But those writers, like it or not, are being paid for their writing. Like it or not, _posterity can only honor us if we sell our work._

Obviously, you're upset. I get that. But you may have let that anger influence netiquette negatively. I have no desire to argue, or read a dissertation of my faults. Especially given that my kids, and my lady, already have that pretty well covered. So in the interest of peace, and having had my say on critiquing, I'll bow out of this thread.


----------



## Phil Istine (Jan 26, 2018)

Jay Greenstein said:


> Several things to keep in mind when reading any critique:
> 
> • Someone who does not really know you took time they didn't have to give you, to help you become a better writer. And they did that just because you asked. You don't have to either follow the advice or agree with it. But in the many years I've been visiting such writing sites I've not found but one or two people who weren't honestly trying to help.
> 
> ...



It's hard to disagree with that.

I would like to add that critique does feel more valuable when the critic takes the time to tailor it to an individual piece rather than giving the appearance of one-size-fits-all.

Personally, I usually try to focus on one or more specific quotations from the piece and offer a suggestion or two, while resisting any temptation to re-write it.

I also like to highlight at least one thing I enjoyed too.  Not everyone does that.

I suppose we all have our own way of doing things.  I prefer a little encouragement to be part of a critique, but it's not compulsory; I'm not the writer's therapist.

I did re-write someone's work on here once, but that was not for others' eyes.  I did it for the writing exercise and because I liked the subject material.  It was fun, but I would never have shown the person what I did (I can't even remember whose work it was now).


----------



## Jay Greenstein (Jan 26, 2018)

One last post:


Garvan said:


> How many poor people have you turned from writing? How many talented people have you ruined? There is no other word for it. Ruined is it.


An interesting question. Let's look at the situation:

A new writer comes here, or to any writing venue. S/he, like everyone else, left their school years believing they know how to write, and need only a good story idea, a knack for words, and some luck. They've spent many nights at the keyboard working on their story. They're deeply invested, emotionally, and are hoping for a few suggestions, but expect an overall, "But it sounds like a great story idea." And of course, when they read the story it works, perfectly. In fact, friends and family have nothing but praise.

But the praise that's been given came from people who have a relationship with the author that influences how they respond. Added to that, because they know the author and how s/he speaks, they can "hear" the author's voice and delivery as they read. 

So although the new member doesn't realize it, they're set up for disaster. They're thinking in terms of plot and Story, with a capital S, and informing the reader as to the plot progression. But the reader is thinking, "Do I find this entertaining?"

The problem isn't related to the story or talent. Guaranteed, the author hasn't addressed the three issues readers want clarified on entering a scene because they literally don't know they should. They don't know what the short-term scene-goal is, and what it does, so they don't address it. They aren't aware of the structure of a scene, so they won't include the necessary elements that keep a reader turning pages. They aren't aware that scenes usually end in disaster for the protagonist, and so won't end the scene or include the sequel that usually follows.

So at that point, what do you tell them? You can't tell if the plot works or not because in the first few pages there is no meaningful plot.

It's not a matter of giving a few suggestions and they're off. People come to writing with a built in roadblock that will sabotage any story they wright and if they are to write readable prose, as a publisher understands that, _it has_ to be fixed. But if that's mentioned you may have people saying, "You're discouraging me. How many talented people have you ruined? 

So in the end, which would you prefer, encouragement that will leave a huge problem not addressed, one that will kill any chance of _having_ a career? Or to learn what you need to do to have one?

My point? Far more careers are killed in the embryo stage because of ignorance than by knowledge.

Some comments by the pros:

*“[/FONT]*[FONT=&quot]Michaelangelo did not have a college degree, nor did Leonardo da Vinci. Thomas Edison didn't. Neither did Mark Twain (though he was granted honorary degrees in later life.) All of these people were professionals. None of them were experts. Get your education from professionals, and always avoid experts.”
  [h=6]*~ *[/FONT][FONT=&quot]*Holly Lisle*[/h]
 “It’s none of their business that you have to learn how to write. Let them think you were born that way.”
~Ernest Hemingway

“Self-expression without craft is for toddlers.”[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]~Rosanne Cash 
                   “Good writing consists of mastering the fundamentals (vocabulary, grammar, the elements of style) and then filling the third level of your toolbox with the right instruments.”
  [FONT=&quot]~ Stephen King

[/FONT]

                          “Good writing is supposed to evoke sensation in the reader, not the fact that it’s raining, but the feeling of being rained upon.”
  ~ E. L. Doctorow

  “There’s no such thing as a born writer. It’s a skill you’ve got to learn, just like learning how to be a bricklayer or a carpenter.”
  ~ Larry Brown

                   “It is impossible to discourage the real writers - they don’t give a damn what you say, they’re going to write.” [/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]~ Sinclair Lewis


----------



## Annoying kid (Jan 26, 2018)

There is no such thing as harsh or lenient critique. Negative or positive. 

There is only logical and illogical. Tone is irrelevant. Only content matters.

One doesn't have to be good at writing to be able to give rational critique. 

Be glad someone took time out of their day to not only read your stuff, but also leave a comment.

Most of us either want to be, or are professionals. 

So we need to take it like a professional.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 27, 2018)

Consider the reasons for writing and the benefits of writing. I do not expect success or material renumeration from my writing, and I reckon that goes for most of us. I get pleasure out of doing it and sharing it, I also get pleasure from improving my skills. Being able to express oneself effectively contributes in a large degree toone's mental well being and happiness.

Looked at from that point of view what are the reasons for the critique?

A business like crit. that says 'This don't work, do that' would be fine if the aim were simply success and renumeration, but is inappropriate otherwise, a more sympathetic approach is more likely to encourage people. You may say 'encourage them to write badly', but it is likely they will write a little better than they did, all writing is practice if you treat it as such.

A crit that simply points out 'errors' and how to 'correct' them, without giving any encouragement, can be very alienating, they tend to remain unread after the first few lines, that is a waste of time on the part of both parties involved. I would define it as a 'Bad' critique, it doesn't even accomplish the aim of showing off the writers knowledge, let alone imparting it to another. If you can not write a crit. that is useful to the author you are addressing you are a bad writer, of critiques anyway, and not getting your message across is *not* the reader's fault, it is always the writers fault, that is a number one rule in any writing.

The words I love seeing in any reply to a crit are 'encouraging' and 'helpful', and in that order, because even if they don't take the advice they may keep writing, and that in itself will help them.


----------



## Darkkin (Jan 27, 2018)

So by way of the reasoning above, an honest critique, even when flooded with positive reinforcement and encouragement is treated as a personal attack, it is bad writing because it fails to help the author, whose understanding of critique is that it amounts to empty praise, and only praise...Bullshit.

A writer going into an open medium like publishing or a forum like this has some personal responsibility, too.  To place all meltdowns, outbursts, and neglected critique at the providers' door is to encourage wretched behavior.  'It was bad writing, sunshine, ignore it...'  _pat, pat..._

But then hey, another reader comes along, reads the piece, and the critique from an objective standpoint...And guess what, Reader B thinks, hey, Critiquer A was on to something.  In the end Critiquer A and Reader B learned a few things about writing, and Writer A has now had the lesson of 'If I don't like it Critiquer A is a bad writer and because Critiquer A is a bad writer that means my words are perfect.'

Sorry to be the Disagreeable Buddy Bear, but the above senerio is too often a real time, real world occurance.  And by the provided parameters of bad critique, well, lets just say it is a cosmic impossibility.  It is not for us to define the impossible, when every writer and readers' circumstamces are unique.

Just some thoughts.

- D.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Jan 27, 2018)

Encouraging is what I look for in critiques, and for help especially since I try too hard to proofread, and all my hard work goes wasted if I have troubles and receive no compliment or good tone. Such as having to detect a positive tone in a critique, and say, in your own words this was encouraging. Since I am blind to a lot of mistakes, it makes sense that I am looking for encouraging words (take my example of the analogy seriously and you'd see a disabled person needs it, no one wants to be disabled when writing stories). Most people should be like that when they are helping. For those harsh critiques you must balance the tone of the critique or they will never listen to what you have to say. That was probably topcols case, and I try my best to accept the harsh reality of a critique that says you must start over again. Maintaining a good agreement (etiquette) and attitude is essential to the person giving the critique. People look to be treated well in real life. Respect is something that encourages and helps the person to  keep writing. It's the best sort of critique. Balance both good comments and negative. If the critique is entirely negative you could have the person fallback on old habits and never learn, especially if the person needs a lot of help. Because they did not understand your critique. Luckily misunderstanding a critique is rare for me and I never want that to happen because they are trying to help me and because I hear a tone that is rarely challenging to hear. I wish I had an ability to understand in the most extreme cases. Therefore critiques with a positive tone are essential, delivery of your message counts. It is rhetoric of the art of persuasion:

good examples are wanted of what I did wrong mainly but good examples too.
good positive feedback, what did I do right and wrong.
good attitude to self-improve, encouragement despite setback no matter how big. 
Persuade the person.
Delivery of the message.
ways to break old habits in writing or new ones.
a balance of good and negative comments if need be.
communication skills and tone.
convincing
constructive
actually is honest.
Isn't silent
A bad attitude of a person who gives a critique will be argumentative as the person who receives the critique (fairness on both sides). Even though we are blind to our own faults, the advice is simple and easy to see what is meant if a person can follow it or understand.
understand it.

I am lucky that I am rarely frustrated with what I get because people do try all these. I have to accept reality and frustration is a natural process. I think there needs to be a balance to the two sides of the coin as each is the antithesis of the other. 

The philosophy of the critiques should be ideally be of the same mindset. Realistically we don't live in that world.


----------



## Firemajic (Jan 27, 2018)

Olly Buckle said:


> If you can not write a crit. that is useful to the author you are addressing you are a bad writer, of critiques anyway, and not getting your message across is *not* the reader's fault, it is always the writers fault, that is a number one rule in any writing.
> .



I agree. The purpose of a critique is to give the person receiving the critique helpful information by way of facts, examples and personal reactions ....If the critique causes confusion, then it does not HELP. 

A map is worthless, unless there are clear, concise instructions in language easily understood, with landmarks and signs easily recognized .... [ jmo]


----------



## Firemajic (Jan 27, 2018)

Darkkin said:


> .
> 
> A writer going into an open medium like publishing or a forum like this has some personal responsibility, too.  To place all meltdowns, outbursts, and neglected critique at the providers' door is to encourage wretched behavior.  'It was bad writing, sunshine, ignore it...'  _pat, pat..._
> - D.



I respect your thoughts, DarKKin.... but, a meltdown, outburst or tantrum from either the writer or the critique is extremely immature...


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 27, 2018)

> So by way of the reasoning above, an honest critique, even when flooded with positive reinforcement and encouragement is treated as a personal attack, it is bad writing because it fails to help the author, whose understanding of critique is that it amounts to empty praise, and only praise.



I don't think that follows from my reasoning, critique and empty praise are not synonymous, and I don't really believe anyone here thinks they are. There are the odd ones whose own good opinion of their own writing blinds them to its failings. If I fail to open their eyes to that, yes that is my failure, though of course I may not be aware of it until I see their response. I usually try to calm the waters so they have a chance to revisit. 

I do what I can to make myself easy to be heard, but every writer has their audience, and if someone does not want to listen they are not part of it. As far as they are concerned I am not a good writer. That is writing in general, but a critique is aimed at helping a specific individual, and if it fails to it has failed, and saying 'She didn't understand, she took it all the wrong way.' will not help the primary aim, even if some third party understands the message and gets something from it, which is often true I think.

 'It was bad writing, sunshine, ignore it...' I wouldn't advocate this any more than you. Try 'Perhaps I phrased that badly, but the underlying message that ...'. Sometimes I am told 'It's not worth it ' , but I hate giving up on people, the really bad ones are only about .001% (I made that up), most are doing what they think they need to to get by. Remember what Pandora found in the bottom of the empty box ?


----------



## Darkkin (Jan 27, 2018)

I think what bothered me about the phrasing is that by the parameters established, that any critique that does not speak to absolutely every reader, every time is thereby defined as a failure.  Critique is a two way street, both the giver and the receiver's understandings.  A dozen people might learn from observations made in one critique, but if Reader Q does not get it, Critiquer A is a failure, despite the fact that more than one person took something away from the observations...

Critique is objective to the writing, not the writer...


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 27, 2018)

Okay, do you think it fair to say,

Saying stuff is not the same as communicating stuff, the stuff may be objective, communication is subjective. Both are needed for there to be a point to it.

I see what you mean about 'every reader', nothing appeals to everyone, but a crit is an aimed communication, even if others read it and get something from it. In the case of the others it is not a failure, but in the case of the person for whom it was written ... though not everyone's motive for writing crit is the benefit of others, another can of worms entirely


----------



## Darkkin (Jan 27, 2018)

Absolutely.  Clear communication that engenders understanding to the benefit of all parties.  I think where I hit a snag with the definition, was with the fact that I am a glaringly, annoyingly literal translator.  What the parameters seemed to imply in the literal sense, was that any critiquer, who failed to reach every reader, every time was not only a purveyor of bad critique, but was also a failure as a writer themselves, because by extension critique is an example of a writer's own work.

Boiled down, it was akin to a parent blaming a teacher for their child's bad grades and/or behavior.  29/30 kids in the class understand and benefit from Teacher A, but Student 30 is not interested in trying.  By laying sole responsibility on the critiquer and not expecting even minimum effort from the reader and then saying it is the failure on the part of the critique, was neither fair nor objective.

As Captain Spock said to General Khord in _The Final Frontier_.  'Damn you, sir.  You will try.  You will try.'

Both sides need to be prepared to be objective and to try.  Open mind when reading, replying, and receiving.

I understand where you are coming from, with critique needing to be clear to be an effective form of communication.  :eagerness:

Always, always include your why...In essence, show your work.  The reasoning behind Observation Q.  Include examples whenever possible.

- D.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Jan 27, 2018)

I am not good with reading people's jokes. (dont understand jokes and sometimes I think it could be something different intended). I have a conflicting doctor's account whether that I am an aspie (but the other doctor never sees my writing samples and treated me for schizoaffective disorder). Which may be true. I am collecting books on aspies by steven graham, and need just one more to complete his most recent research on writing strategies. The most recent critique given to me, some of the findings of what the books by steven graham show on writing and special needs. Autistic brains are not good for writing in a lot of case studies according to something I read. Anyways, I found out I need to pay attention to those books. The advice is very basic, on strategies to write stories. Lacking transition is one of the things mentioned in grahams, book. Using the wh questions. It was two critiques given too me that mentioned this. That said I must say who, what, and so on (pow strategy), and use feelings. Use cause and effect. Use problem complication solution. Conflict is a complication between two characters, when one is lacking something because someone has a goal or desire. (example some one wants to buy a dog, and someone needs a job, so the person who wants to be friends with someone creates a story problem). When a character fails, there is a new goal. The character should fail.

So like darkkin I have that unique aspect to interpreting comments or  what people say I am literal as well since my brain is wired a different way. I still benefit from critiques that can be harsh but maintain that good attitude.


----------



## Gofa (Jan 28, 2018)

Simple test 
Never take a No from someone who cant give you a yes
further to this make sure the critic is more capable than you
in sports you improve by playing more able competitors


----------



## Kyle R (Jan 28, 2018)

Jay Greenstein said:


> The problem isn't related to the story or talent. Guaranteed, the author hasn't addressed the three issues readers want clarified on entering a scene because they literally don't know they should. They don't know what the short-term scene-goal is, and what it does, so they don't address it. They aren't aware of the structure of a scene, so they won't include the necessary elements that keep a reader turning pages. They aren't aware that scenes usually end in disaster for the protagonist, and so won't end the scene or include the sequel that usually follows.


I'm a fan of the Swain-ian Scene/Sequel approach, as well. But—it's just one way to structure our fiction. It's not the _only_ way.

If the author is clearly trying for such a structure, by all means, help them with it. But if that's not what they're trying to do—then it's better (in my opinion) to recognize what the author _is_ trying to do, and offer suggestions on that. :encouragement:


----------



## Jay Greenstein (Jan 29, 2018)

Olly Buckle said:


> A business like crit. that says 'This don't work, do that' would be fine if the aim were simply success and renumeration, but is inappropriate otherwise, a more sympathetic approach is more likely to encourage people.


I had to respond to this because I think you've missed something important.

No one would say a word if you said, "This won't work because you punctuated poorly. You might want to read this book on punctuation." Nor would they object if you say, "It won't work because the grammar sucks, and here's where you can find our more about grammar." Why then is it wrong to say, "This won't work because you're using the techniques of verbal storytelling in a medium that won't support them—and here's where you can learn the tricks of our profession?" I've never figured out why people accept that it took us twelve years of schooling in nonfiction writing, designed to ready us for the needs of our future employers; why they accept that we can't write screenplays, stage plays, or work in journalism without more knowledge than our High school English classes, yet reject the idea that writing fiction for the page might have its own set of necessary tricks and knowledge. 

It's nice to say that there are no rigid rules to writing fiction for the page. But there are tools that are necessary—and not either taught or mentioned in our school days. Surely it's not wrong to mention that? Like it or not, our words are read by people who have, since childhood, read/purchased pretty much only professionally written and prepared books. So they're going to judge our writing by _their_ tastes. No way around that. Doesn't it make sense for us to know, understand, and take those tastes into account?

Sure, we can write in any way we care to. And if we do we have the most lenient of critics. And, it can be fun. But if we take the approach that simply by writing we can somehow intuit the tricks of the trade, our submissions will comprise the 99.9% of books rejected.

My personal view is that if someone posts a story, and doesn't say, "This is just for fun." I have no way to tell the, "I don't give a damm if a publisher—or a reader in the bookstore—likes it," from the "I hope to query this some day," people. So I have no choice but to treat it as if it's someone who hopes to write like a pro.

Maybe we need three boxes at the bottom of the first post in a thread: "I want a serious critique," "Some hints would be nice," and "Just for fun."


----------



## TheFuhrer02 (Jan 29, 2018)

For some reason, I don't like giving negative criticism. I might give a few things I thought were a bit off, but only if I really liked the piece as a whole. I think this is because I don't feel worthy or experienced enough to be dishing out bad crits. If I don't like a piece, or if I feel a text needs a lot more work, I simply don't post on the thread.

I'm better at taking crits, I guess.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 29, 2018)

> So I have no choice but to treat it as if it's someone who hopes to write like a pro.


There is always a choice, Jay. You could choose to treat everyone as an amateur writing a practice piece aimed at expanding the writer's ability and personal growth, after all it is on a writing forum, not a publisher's desk. The clue of how totreat it is usually in the post, but even if you think they want to be a pro. you can still start, "I think you want to be a professional writer, if this is the case you may well benefit from reading Dwight" . This sort of 'soft' approach is much more likely to end with someone taking the advice than if you say, "This is all wrong, read Dwight and you will see how you should do it."
Giving advice in a form unacceptable to the recipient is a waste of time, no matter how good the advice.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Jan 29, 2018)

In all communication, indeed, all relationships, there's two individuals involved. Each has a responsibility to aid the communication or relationship. It's like a bridge over a ravine. You both must maintain your side to keep the bridge safe.

What I see in this thread, and throughout the site, is a lot of finger pointing at the other guy (too sensitive, needs a thicker skin, etc), while forgetting about the other three fingers pointing back at self.

By the way, the OP has left. As has another recent addition. How many join and quit before a month has passed? There's effort put into attracting new members, but what's the point if they just turn around and quit?


----------



## Jay Greenstein (Jan 30, 2018)

> There is always a choice, Jay. You could choose to treat everyone as an  amateur writing a practice piece aimed at expanding the writer's ability  and personal growth, after all it is on a writing forum, not a  publisher's desk.


So, we don't want to mention the things that would get a given piece rejected in the first paragraph when they post it for critique? Shall we treat each piece as if it was written only for fun? If we don't actually help people achieve publication, and only play whispering down the lane with writing advice, treating all advice as being equally valid, yes, we will avoid discouraging people who aren't interested in publication. But won't we, at thre same time, kill the career of those who are serious about writing and hoping for accurate advice?

I admit to being confused. What in the hell do people have against learning the _basics_ of writing fiction? Suggest that someone read a book on the subject, one that publishers recommend, and you hear, "Don't stifle my creativity!" Mention a point mentioned in such a book and you hear, "You're discouraging me." It's not like learning the basics is all that hard. But don't learn them and there is zero chance of ever selling a manuscript—or talking people into buying a self-released book.

The frustrating part for me is that I get letters from people who achieve publication after having taken the steps to learn what publishers view as a well constructed story. I didn't make published writers of them, I simply pointed them in the right direction and told them why it's necessary. But I've been on writing sites since before the Internet existed. And in that time, not once has someone come back and said, "Jay, I sold that story you said had problems, without changing it." Not once. And the rejection rate, today, is 99.9% Surely, something more is needed than a pure heart, sincerity, and high school writing skills.

And now, before I piss people off more than I have, I'll bow out of this discussion, get some sleep, and and go play with my brand new Grandson.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Jan 30, 2018)

...


----------



## H.Brown (Jan 30, 2018)

Jay Greenstein said:


> So, we don't want to mention the things that would get a given piece rejected in the first paragraph when they post it for critique? Shall we treat each piece as if it was written only for fun? If we don't actually help people achieve publication, and only play whispering down the lane with writing advice, treating all advice as being equally valid, yes, we will avoid discouraging people who aren't interested in publication. But won't we, at thre same time, kill the career of those who are serious about writing and hoping for accurate advice?
> 
> I admit to being confused. What in the hell do people have against learning the _basics_ of writing fiction? Suggest that someone read a book on the subject, one that publishers recommend, and you hear, "Don't stifle my creativity!" Mention a point mentioned in such a book and you hear, "You're discouraging me." It's not like learning the basics is all that hard. But don't learn them and there is zero chance of ever selling a manuscript—or talking people into buying a self-released book.
> 
> ...



Nobody likes to be told that they are wrong, Jay, what Olly is saying here (imo) is there is more than one way to point out the flaws in a piece of writing. 

We do not need to bang our writers over the head with our critique. Can we not approach critique as friendly advice, for example when pointing out a flaw, could we not also point out a good part. Instaed of telling someone to read said book, we could offer to point them in the direction of books that may help, if they wish. Allow them to take that step and ask for it.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Jan 30, 2018)

H.Brown said:


> Nobody likes to be told that they are wrong, Jay, what Olly is saying here (imo) is there is more than one way to point out the flaws in a piece of writing.
> 
> We do not need to bang our writers over the head with our critique. Can we not approach critique as friendly advice, for example when pointing out a flaw, could we not also point out a good part. Instaed of telling someone to read said book, we could offer to point them in the direction of books that may help, if they wish. Allow them to take that step and ask for it.



Thank you for finding a more polite way to say what I wanted to say.

I would like to add that it might even be possible to give the advice the book would provide directly.


----------



## Smith (Jan 30, 2018)

I've received critique from Jay around half a dozen times now and I haven't had any problem with it. So needless to say I'm baffled.

After having taken a step back from this thread (I needed it), everything's been said that needs to be said in my opinion. I spend enough time in the workshops to know that assholes aren't running rampant; part of that is thanks to our moderators and admins, and the rest is thanks to the people who critique like a well-socialized human being. You know, the people who report the bad posts, and then lead by example by giving their own constructive criticism.

As I mentioned before, I decided to take the time out of my day to play Sherlock Holmes and go through all of the OP's critiques myself, and - while I'm no professional investigator, nor do I have any cocaine, and it's perfectly possible I missed something blatant - I honestly didn't see anything disturbing or appalling, or out of line.

How do I define "disturbing", "appalling", or generally "out of line"?

Simple: is the critique about the writer (i.e. personal attacks), or about the piece. And is it constructive or destructive.

When critique is constructive, it is written with the intention of bettering the piece and the author. Jay's critiques have only ever come across to me as wanting to be helpful, and if he thinks that reading a few books on writing - whether they be Swain or whoever else he references - will help me, then so be it. I'll either check them out or I won't; I'm not obligated to do as Jay says. I actually bought a couple of books by Swain, and I don't regret it. Reading Swain didn't make me an overnight master at the craft, but in the end I felt like I had something I could reference, some of his insight and perspectives were interesting, and it illuminated a few tools to me that I hadn't been aware of before.

All things considered, the catastrophizing that has occurred in this thread is ridiculous. Any new person who comes across this thread might read some of these posts and think that everybody is a cutthroat dick in the workshops. This is all an overreaction to a make-believe, theoretical, ambiguous, amorphous boogeyman. The conversation's fallen to where otherwise perfectly reasonable critiques are being taken completely the wrong way. I am of the opinion that if you feel as if somebody has a negative tone to their post, whether it comes across as snarky or contemptuous or whatever, you might want to give them the benefit of the doubt. The internet is notorious for these sorts of interpretive misunderstandings. If it's not a misunderstanding, keep in mind that their tone does not change the accuracy or inaccuracy of their statements.

And another thing you might try doing to see if your defensive reaction is justifiable, would be to see how other people react to person x's critiques. Most people react quite well to Jay's critiques, as far as I can tell from looking at several other people he has responded to. None of which is to say his critique is perfect, and that there aren't some things he can try differently to improve his critique. But he is far from some sort of culprit here. He's not the witch you're looking for.

I'm keeping an open mind about this. If new members are leaving because they're being harassed, bullied, or *ACTIVELY* (see: maliciously) discouraged, that needs to stop. It cannot be tolerated. But so far that doesn't seem to be the case, and it's amusing that nobody can track-down the cause of the problem (probably because it's imaginary). Rather, it appears as if the spell of drama has grabbed hold and proceeded to take what amounts to nothing, and blow it out of proportion. That is to say, after having looked into the issue - which so far nobody to my knowledge has even attempted - it would appear that everybody is getting worked up over a false alarm.

If new members are leaving because somebody left them an honest critique without patting them on the head, oh well. Their loss, not ours.

While I'm at it, I'd respectfully advise that these matters are better handled in a more private manner, and that the OP would have benefited from having written their post in a way that was generalized. (ex. "One thing I do when I get patronizing, sarcastic or otherwise unhelpful feedback, is look to see what kind of feedback this person receives on their own work. You may find out that they, too, have a lot to learn about writing.")


----------



## Carly Berg (Jan 31, 2018)

Nvmd.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Jan 31, 2018)

I'm going to try to spell out the problem, since Smith asked.

A critique that says, "Your first paragraph contains an info dump and is boring" is a straight forward, honest, yet constructive critique. It might sting a bit to a new and hopeful writer, but will probably help more than hurt.

A critique that is long and involved, sometimes longer than the piece itself, that TELLS the writer what s/he knows (nothing, and is an assumption), and then claims the only solution to the assumption, I mean "problem", is to study THE BOOK, or read HIS articles on writing, and mentions having mentored writers (for a fee, most likely), is more of a commercial than a critique. It can be pretty demoralizing to a newbie who lacks the confidence or experience to see it clearly. Or maybe some folks are more sensitive to subliminal messaging and internalize the "you know nothing" part. Or maybe they haven't read enough of other members' threads to see the same messages are in every critique written by that particular member.


----------



## Smith (Jan 31, 2018)

EDITED: Jay's never told me "you know nothing Smith", and I think it's a stretch to suggest that's an intentional subliminal message. If it's a marketing scheme, it's a shitty one unless he's also Dwight Swain in disguise.

But, I digress. If that's the way he rubs you and others, I've got no control over that. Just thought I'd weigh in and say it isn't self-evident to me that his critique is somehow wrong or unhelpful. He's done plenty good by me and I'm thankful for it.


----------



## Pluralized (Jan 31, 2018)

With writing, especially in this weird digital era wherein we all share our work with each other instantaneously and can solicit feedback from all corners of the world, I believe there is a natural maturation process we must undergo if we're ever going to really improve. We start out as wide-eyed morons, writing really crappy little stories that have no logical arc and spend all these words trying to sound writerly, and our feelings are hurt when someone calls us out on it.

Over time, we get varied and wonderful feedback from the group, and we grow up a little bit each time. The sting of reality dissipates and we try again. Critiques from our peers, from those more experienced than ourselves, and especially those with an impartial, unemotional view of the writing, can help more than any self-study of books and articles. They have to pinch a little bit sometimes though, because otherwise we think our writing is better than it is and pride colors our perception. When I look back on the stories I posted in my early days here at WF, then read through the critiques that helped me the most, they tended to be the most blunt and harsh. But nobody was ever hateful or outright mean, even though it seemed like it at the time. They were just sharing their reaction to the piece and giving me free advice. Which I value greatly!

Some critiquers are drive-by, single-sentence blast, like "I liked it." Some give fifteen hundred words about how you should be re-thinking your approach, going to the public library, and learning the formulaic approach of the masters so you can sell more books. Most are in the middle though, telling you where they started to lose the story, where the logic gaps are, things that were written poorly, etc.

They are all valuable. We should be thankful to have the resource. It's helped me so much I cannot even really get my head around it. Receiving and giving, in equal parts. Giving others critique on their writing has helped me too, in a different way, as it's helped me to be more objective about everything. Less emotional.

I believe our response to critique should always be "thank you" but more importantly, we should endeavor to reciprocate. Otherwise we are simply leeches and will gain little. 

Thank you to everyone on this site who gives of their precious free time to try and help others, in whatever style they choose. Let's stop bitching about it and be the change we want to see, eh?


----------



## Terry D (Jan 31, 2018)

*It's time to get this thread back on-track and dispense with discussions of any one person's style of critique. Thanks.*


----------



## Jay Greenstein (Feb 2, 2018)

H.Brown said:


> Nobody likes to be told that they are wrong, Jay, what Olly is saying here (imo) is there is more than one way to point out the flaws in a piece of writing.


If I'm wrong I damn well want to know. What possible reason would someone have to be missing data that might get them published and not want to know that?

Sure, there are people who are just writing and posting whatever comes into their head. But since we can't tell them from the people who are working hard to achieve publication, and seeking help, I would much rather offend someone who isn't interested in improving, by giving them an accurate critique, then fail to give accurate advice to a serious writer.

Most of us, myself included, leave our school years believing that writing is writing, and that we know the mechanics of that. So of course everyone believes their work is perfect. I did till my first paid critique showed how little I did know. At times I feel like the character from this little play.


----------



## sas (Feb 2, 2018)

Jay,  First thing I watched with my morning coffee was your video post. Still smiling. Reminded me of my daughter-in-law. She is self-taught artist, and unlike video character, quite good. She has a traditional career making well over six figures. When agency offered to promote her work, she immediately, and I mean immediately, talked about quitting her job. My son had to hold on to the table, so as not to hit the floor. Well, two years later she has made $300. She kept her day job, thank gawd.


----------



## lumino (Feb 9, 2018)

That is true. I have had trouble accepting criticism because sometimes I felt that the person giving the critique was being harsh rather than trying to help me. This was due to my own misunderstanding of their tone and intentions, and perhaps the kind of writing that they prefer to read. But I understand that those with experience do know better in many cases, and that you can benefit from their wisdom.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Feb 9, 2018)

I still say the author needs to take the time to learn about the one critiquing so as not to be misled by one who blows hot air. It can happen, even if there's the best of intentions.


----------



## Tettsuo (Feb 9, 2018)

After writing two novels I can tell you with full assurance, you're going to get more than a few bad reviews.  Get use to it.  No one, no matter how many awards they win, will avoid receiving bad reviews or harsh criticisms.

You can never make everyone happy or impress every single reader.  It's not possible.  If you expect that, stop writing now, because you're going to be seriously wounded over time.


----------



## Tettsuo (Feb 9, 2018)

lumino said:


> That is true. I have had trouble accepting criticism because sometimes I felt that the person giving the critique was being harsh rather than trying to help me. This was due to my own misunderstanding of their tone and intentions, and perhaps the kind of writing that they prefer to read. But I understand that those with experience do know better in many cases, and that you can benefit from their wisdom.


The harshest most painful critiques are those peppered with truth.  Take what will help, learn from it, move forward and discard the rest.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Feb 9, 2018)

Yep, there will always be the errant bad review even if you write War & Peace.  But your book should ideally be ranking at 4 stars or better (or it really is bad.)


----------

