# Taboos in Critiquing



## thepancreas11 (Mar 24, 2014)

I sometimes wonder if what I say really speaks harshly to people. I'm just wondering what kinds of things to avoid when I write a critique to make sure that I come across as constructive and honest simultaneously.


----------



## bookmasta (Mar 24, 2014)

Don't be harsh, but be honest. As a writer, having a thick skin is needed, especially when it comes to feedback. From the writing side of things, not everyone will like your work the way you hope. But as the one critiquing someone's work, sugarcoating the truth doesn't help either.


----------



## dale (Mar 24, 2014)

emotionally detached honesty is best, for better or worse. like really critique the piece itself, not the writer or any envy or mockery of the work. 
an honest critique may seem "harsh", but it's better than a lie.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Mar 24, 2014)

bookmasta said:


> As a writer, having a thick skin is needed, especially when it comes to feedback. From the writing side of things, not everyone will like your work the way you hope. But as the one critiquing someone's work, sugarcoating the truth doesn't help either.



Firm but fair, perhaps?

I agree that a person doing a critique should avoid being harsh if at all possible. Yet the person also has to be fair. That's generally understood by most of us.

The problem with the "thick skin" part of your statement is this. A new writer, fresh off writing his first piece that he is now posting for the consideration of his peers, may not already have developed the thick skin that writers wind up needing. 

Someone unintentionally being overly harsh could very well send someone towards the "I knew it wasn't very good, but I didn't think it was THAT bad" side of things. That, in turn, could either turn them away from writing (like it did me for a very long time) or make them extremely reluctant to put their work up for critique. We all know that there are times when writers aren't the most confident or secure bunch. Tht is never more true than when posting their work for people to see and comment on.

Be honest? Yes. Be constructive? Yes. Be harsh? If you already know the writer can take the criticism, fine. If you don't know the writer, be as firm but fair as possible.


----------



## popsprocket (Mar 24, 2014)

Just be honest. There's nothing worse than a critique that sugar coats anything. Writing is one of those things where you don't learn much by having your mother put that one poem you wrote up on the fridge. Better to have people tell you it's utter crap.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Mar 25, 2014)

popsprocket said:


> Just be honest. There's nothing worse than a critique that sugar coats anything. Writing is one of those things where you don't learn much by having your mother put that one poem you wrote up on the fridge. Better to have people tell you it's utter crap.



There are ways to do it without crushing someone's confidence, though. That's my point.


----------



## bookmasta (Mar 25, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> There are ways to do it without crushing someone's confidence, though. That's my point.



Then I suppose it depends on the audience we're talking about. Everyone who begins writing is just that, a beginner. And so, they need to be encouraged. However, its also important to be honest. Its a fine line between the two that needs to be conveyed in a supportive manner.


----------



## popsprocket (Mar 25, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> There are ways to do it without crushing someone's confidence, though. That's my point.



Of course, but at a certain point softening your words makes them easier to dismiss for the writer. You can give them a truth that isn't soul-crushing, but it also has to be a truth that can't be easily ignored or brushed aside.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Mar 25, 2014)

bookmasta said:


> Then I suppose it depends on the audience we're talking about. Everyone who begins writing is just that, a beginner. And so, they need to be encouraged. However, its also important to be honest. Its a fine line between the two that needs to be conveyed in a supportive manner.



Exactly. Perhaps I am missing the definition of "harsh" as Pancreas intends it. I haven't read many crits around here and I haven't read any of his. So, I really don't know for sure what he means by "harsh".

I can only relate what I consider to be harsh. That was the treatment I got from a teacher I respected. 

I look at it from the perspective of someone who  was once an insecure High School Freshman who just needed someone to let him know that it was ok to have a decent idea but be bad at communicating it.

Yes, a beginning writer is most likely going to turn out a few thousand words of garbage. We all know this. But that beginning writer may or may not know it.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Mar 25, 2014)

popsprocket said:


> Of course, but at a certain point softening your words makes them easier to dismiss for the writer. You can give them a truth that isn't soul-crushing, but it also has to be a truth that can't be easily ignored or brushed aside.



I have no issue with that. None at all.

I am not suggesting that being harsh is totally bad. I'm just saying that, along with the harsh, there needs to be some building up as well. 

For me, even though several things I have posted here and elsewhere got pretty well picked apart, there was normally (although not always) something letting me know that I had done something, if not completely right, at least well enough to be able to improve it.


----------



## bookmasta (Mar 25, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> Exactly. Perhaps I am missing the definition of "harsh" as Pancreas intends it. I haven't read many crits around here and I haven't read any of his. So, I really don't know for sure what he means by "harsh".
> 
> I can only relate what I consider to be harsh. That was the treatment I got from a teacher I respected.
> 
> ...



I can relate to that. When I first started writing short stories, I thought they were ingenious and my poor teacher would read through them, nod with a pained smile, and move onto the next one. And that's the thing, its okay to be a beginner. Its okay to be starting out because everyone who is an author has been there.


----------



## ppsage (Mar 25, 2014)

Critique the text; praise the author. Offer some credential for SPaG revisions; offer style and content suggestions as opinion only. Speak to personal reaction; do not speak for generic _readers_ or _editors._ What the critiquer specifically understands to have happened, and what meaning that specifically imparts, can be more valuable than anything else one says. Understand that each critique is an episode in an ongoing conversation; more chances will arise. Some critiques are better delivered privately and humbly, if harshness is a worry.


----------



## dale (Mar 25, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> Exactly. Perhaps I am missing the definition of "harsh" as Pancreas intends it. I haven't read many crits around here and I haven't read any of his. So, I really don't know for sure what he means by "harsh".
> 
> I can only relate what I consider to be harsh. That was the treatment I got from a teacher I respected.
> 
> ...



  i'm think it goes against most of our nature's to criticize anyone else's work, knowing our own insecurities about our own work. i personally have always felt a certain level of "guilt" when i critique someone's piece...because i understand they put a piece of themselves into it. i think his use of the word "harsh' may reflect this sort of guilt.


----------



## thepancreas11 (Mar 25, 2014)

dale, you're absolutely right. I know what it takes to write a novel just the first time through. To put my own label on their work feels as though I'm poking the blisters on their tired fingers.


----------



## dale (Mar 25, 2014)

thepancreas11 said:


> dale, you're absolutely right. I know what it takes to write a novel just the first time through. To put my own label on their work feels as though I'm poking the blisters on their tired fingers.



it's true...but we have to kind of push that out of our minds. because we're all somewhat amateurs, or we wouldn't be here. 
when i 1st came here, i may have thought myself a genius (ha ha)....but then i read others here and realized i needed to learn
a lot. and if not for people like jonm, kylecolorado, leyline, chrismiller, and others critiquing my work? i would have learned nothing. 
we should come here to hear the criticism more than the praise. otherwise? we may as well just go to a porn site and jerk off
while we type.


----------



## A_Jones (Mar 25, 2014)

Brutal honesty is a must.  But no scorn.   "It made me want to pluck my eyes out!"  is scorn where as "I had a really hard time getting my brain to grasp your work.  Your words feel unnatural to me."  brutal honesty.  Many people confuse the two. But I have never seen you be scornful on here. 

Suggestions are important.  What words to change out maybe, or the idea that they put something more about a character in or maybe to take something out.  

I'n my opinion you should never 'show' a writer how something should be done.  A writer needs to learn to do these things by themselves.  And you wouldn't want to over step your bounds by causing their characters to go out of character.  

You have been made a mentor P, that obviously means the admins here think you are doing something right.


----------



## Pluralized (Mar 25, 2014)

thepancreas11 said:


> I sometimes wonder if what I say really speaks harshly to people. I'm just wondering what kinds of things to avoid when I write a critique to make sure that I come across as constructive and honest simultaneously.



Pank - you're a pretty astute reader, and your critiques are always helpful. I'd say the first thing to do is to not worry about how your critiques are taken - just do your thing. You're trying to help, after all, and offering your time for free.

Sometimes the harshest critiques are the best and the only ones that stick with people. I can tell you just about every one that has made me feel the sting, and I've noticed a healthy upsurge in the quality of my writing over time as a result. Gratuitous placation has no value to writers that actually want to improve. Might not be a popular opinion, I realize.

Just my thoughts. Don't ever change, Pank. You're really good at this.


----------



## Pandora (Mar 25, 2014)

It depends on the person receiving the critique.  I wouldn't want to scare away a new writer from the forums with brutal honesty, not everyone can or wants to take that.
I would always side on kindness, finding pluses in the art because it came from someone's heart. Maybe some people don't know when they are being harsh but harshness is easy to spot.


----------



## stevesh (Mar 25, 2014)

I'd say be as honest as you can about the nuts-and-bolts stuff like  spelling and grammar. Any writer who hasn't mastered those rules  deserves a little harshness. For the rest, I'd agree with *ppsage*: critique the text, praise the author.


----------



## shadowwalker (Mar 25, 2014)

I really hate the words "brutal" and "harsh" when used with critiquing. There's no reason for either, IMO, and I've been beta-ing for many years. And I hate it even more when people use "sugar-coating" as opposing those two words, as if it had to be one extreme or the other. Constructive criticism is not brutal, harsh, or sugar-coated. It is honest, impersonal, and _designed to help the writer_.


----------



## thepancreas11 (Mar 25, 2014)

I guess it's just in my nature not to be to put people down, and sometimes criticism feels like I'm doing just that. I'll keep at it! Thanks for the info, everyone!


----------



## Greimour (Mar 25, 2014)

I don't think any method is right or wrong in critiquing... My opinion and reasons are as follows:

As a writer, you should be able to bend your way of thinking to that of your characters. Is your character a mean person? Loving? Tender of heart? Dauntless? Cruel or Malicious? When you post writing to be critiqued, you are basically asking for the opinions of those both more intelligent and less intelligent than yourself. You are not limiting the opinions to professionals who know what they are talking about... you are basically opening it up for a fictional character to offer an opinion. So, if it is a fictional character giving the opinion, you should be able to bend your mind to their way of thinking and see why they critiqued your work the way they did....

Lets take Beans (the cider farmer from Fantastic Mr Fox) by Roald Dahl:
"Your writing is boring at best. Your spelling is decent but your grammar could use work. I would not buy your book."

And then Badger, from Lion Witch and Wardrobe by C. S. Lewis:
"Very well done. I am not able to string such a tale myself, so I am envious. I see great potential in you... I would happily read anything else you may have written or write in the future.

Now.. they are critiquing the same story, but it is their fundamental character that makes them critique in such a way. If you have your story open to critique by any random stranger, expect all kinds of responses. You can not take all critiques for every word they say... nor can you choose to ignore all of what someone says when  you don't like it. 

You have to find the feedback that matters hidden within a critique. Most will likely be a waste of time reading - but others will offer an insight you have never seen before.

Examples:

I enjoyed the story but .... This bit of critique is softening a heavier blow. It does nothing for your story and only helps ease your ego. All in all, it is useless in a critique save for helping fend off hurtful comments. I use it quite often sadly, but in truth it has no place being in a critique.

You started off strong with a good hook... This is better, but it is immediately indicating you went off that strong path. 

I could keep listing examples forever I expect. Long enough to get you sleepy at least. So, I have two methods of critiquing.
Though I do not presume to know all the rules of grammar, or believe I will spell every word correctly every single time (human error or a momentary dictionary malfunction aside) ... I do believe I at least have some opinions worth giving.

My method of critiquing, though includes some of the above mentioned uselessness - includes the following:



> Quotes a Passage.


*Offers feedback* This section drew me out of the story. You explained it in a really complicated way... you could have just as easily wrote ***** ***** *** and it would have done the same job so much easier.



> Quotes a Passage.


You need to break the sentence up a bit here. Try reading it out loud the way you wrote it... Unless you have lungs of a whale, I doubt you could do it in one breath. Adding a comma after the word **** half way in would do the trick. Personally though, I would reconstruct the sentence like this: *example here*

....


By the end of one of my critiques, I think I have fairly given (or at least tried to give) 3 opinions.
1. As a reader. 
2, As a proof reader. 
3. As a writer... 

Giving opinions from all 3 sides of who we are as writers and critiques is in my opinion the fairest way to be. Collectively, the writer may then somewhere in your essay, find some measure of help to better their writing.

So: Reason there is no wrong way to critique?

For those who didn't catch it... the reason is thus: A writer who puts his work on the net to be critiqued by strangers should expect every level of criticism. From educated to uneducated and back again. From mean people to nice people. They should expect this of non paid free opinions... if they want a professional opinion, they should hire a professional. Most critiques probably come from avid readers who give opinions based purely on the story. Here on these forums, we tend to give opinions based on *our* writing style preferences and on their *actual writing*, not their story. 

If you are willing to accept that the critiquer _(technically that is a word)_ is uneducated, you can't expect it to be professional. 

As such we are mentoring each other. Would you ask a 13 year-old getting C's in English to teach you grammar? Would you get a Frenchman with limited English to proof read your English novel? 
Writers should take critiques with a pinch of salt and critiques should just be honest. Harsh or not. New writers may be deterred by harsh critiques, but writers will always write... those who can't will learn to. Those who fail and quit but remain passionate, will eventually try again. Egg shells are for oviparous animals... or at least the offspring thereof. 



Kev.


----------



## shadowwalker (Mar 26, 2014)

Greimour, I'm going to have to disagree a bit with you. Yes, if a writer puts their work up for crit just anywhere, they aren't guaranteed a constructive or even useful critique. Your examples of Beans and Badger, for example - those are not even crits, so getting that sort of comment would be of utterly no use. 

However, when one comes to a writing group or a writing forum, the expectation is (and should be, IMO) that the writers there will know _something _of what they're talking about - mainly because they are also writers themselves. And writers in such groups/forums should, again IMO, be willing and indeed eager to learn how to give truly constructive criticism, since that can benefit their _own _work as well. It is a skill worth learning.


----------



## Greimour (Mar 26, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> Greimour, I'm going to have to disagree a bit with you. Yes, if a writer puts their work up for crit just anywhere, they aren't guaranteed a constructive or even useful critique. Your examples of Beans and Badger, for example - those are not even crits, so getting that sort of comment would be of utterly no use.
> 
> However, when one comes to a writing group or a writing forum, the expectation is (and should be, IMO) that the writers there will know _something _of what they're talking about - mainly because they are also writers themselves. And writers in such groups/forums should, again IMO, be willing and indeed eager to learn how to give truly constructive criticism, since that can benefit their _own _work as well. It is a skill worth learning.



I am not sure which part you are disagreeing with. :/

The Beans and Badger are examples of crits seen on this very site, I used them as reference for the sake of pointing out the uselessness found in crits, as well as how personalities of the critiquer may affect what they say - even professional ones. I Also later pointed out that on this forums, the writers crit in a different manner to those of readers. We comment on prose, spelling, grammar, writing style and flow etc... I remember reading once in a British Paper abut Harry Potter: "A real page turner from start to end, I simply could not put the book down. Rowling did a wonderful job of bringing delightful creatures to life with an entirely new perspective... blah blah blah..."

We, on this forum, don't often give comments like that. We say how certain sentences can be improved on, how a specific sentence really lit up a scene... how the descriptive section flowed smoothly between action A and event B. 

Additionally, I did say that on these forums we teach each other... but on that same note, we know close to nothing about each other outside these forums. So essentially, I could be a teenager home schooled by a B grade High School graduate with no higher learning to speak of. If that is the case, I would hardly be an ideal candidate when someone wants a critique. 

From my understanding of your post, what you disagree with is what we should expect from critiques on these forums... but as I said, Beans and Badger comments are of the like I have seen on these forums. I have yet to see two people with the same standards of critiquing. Whether very poor and useless or excellent and professional, I have seen almost every level of critique here. I love these forums more than any other writing forum site I have visited. This is the only site I have stuck with. There was a long time searching for a site as good as this one and I am truly impressed with a vast majority of the people here... 
but...

 I wont ignore the fact that a beginner in writing (for which this site has many) are also beginners in critiquing. 
Therefore, the level of their critique is also at varying standards and writers posting for critiques here should also keep that in mind.

A beginner in writing is not expected to knock out a 'ready to publish' standard of writing...
A beginner in critiquing should equally not be expected to give a crit response of the same level as someone who does it on a professional level.

Did I misunderstand what you disagreed with?


Kev.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Mar 26, 2014)

If there's good to be found (and there usually is), be sure to bring it up; not only will it prove you're not being a jerk for the sake of being a jerk, but it will also offer some legitimacy (assumed objectivity) to your criticism.  That said, you should be very clear and direct about the flaws you find.  If you don't point something out for fear of hurting someone's feelings, that flaw might never get fixed.  Comment on every error, but if you find some building up, it's probably better to generalize.  ("Watch your comma splices." instead of pointing out the sixteen individual instances.)

Oh, and never, ever offer compliments out of a sense of obligation, or criticize only because someone said something you didn't like.  I remember long ago, when I was exchanging reviews with someone on a fanfiction site, I was very plain about what I did and didn't like.  The first line of her response? "I was ready to say good things about your story, but I'm not so sure now!"  If you're only offering praise because you want praise in return, you can keep it.  I don't want that sort of compliment anyway.


----------



## shadowwalker (Mar 27, 2014)

The part I was disagreeing with was where you said one would have to get a professional for a proper critique. As to comments made on the forum, I've seen those same types of comments on many writing forums and no, they aren't particularly helpful and yes, they typically come from 'beginning' critiquers. But just as writers learn how to choose which comments to accept, critiquers learn how to make those comments. The thing about writing groups and forums is that we are all (or for the most part) writers, and we want to learn. We want each other to succeed. And when someone makes a comment in a critique that is basically a generalized review, I would hope and assume that others would help them learn how to actually critique. In a non-writing forum, that's highly unlikely to happen. 

As to "A beginner in critiquing should equally not be expected to give a crit response of the same level as someone who does it on a professional level." I have seen some marvelously on-target crits given by "beginners" simply by virtue of the fact they didn't know they shouldn't be honest. Once people get past the "I've never done this before so what do I know" stage, the only real necessity is to be able to state what seemed off and articulate why that might be (and even the second is not really needed, but very helpful). The rest is just window-dressing.


----------



## Greimour (Mar 29, 2014)

Ah, I guess that section was just poorly worded. I merely meant that, if you are allowing the entire forum to give a critique, then you should be expecting every level of critique. If they only want professional critiques - they "should" pay for one. Not that they have to. Only that if they are being super picky about 'who' critiques and 'what kind' of critique they get, then they should go ask someone more biased - possibly a person who may be of a persuasion that follows money.


----------



## Ariel (Mar 29, 2014)

As for the earlier "thick-skinned" commentary I once had a workshop class in college where the person whose work was being critiqued was not allowed to speak until the very end.  Every person in the group had their say and not a response was allowed.  

I resented it at the time but now I know it was essential for me as a writer to learn to let go of those emotions and face the criticism with stoicism.  I think that all writers can benefit of such a course.

The thing a lot of writers have trouble with (I have trouble with it myself) is realizing that a mistake in the grammar or spelling of their writing doesn't mean _the writer or their work_ is bad.

As far as critiquing I point out anything obviously off; offer praise on phrases, the voice, or images I enjoyed; point out places where I couldn't follow the writing; point out obvious logical fallacies; and try to just be honest with the critique.  If I don't point out a million things it's because someone else has cornered that bit or it really didn't bother me.  

If all I have is praise I don't bother but the same is true if all I have is criticism.


----------



## Rivahads (Mar 29, 2014)

I want a person to stuff a sock in my writing mouth( voice )if it sucks . I am neither sensitive about the words I write nor do they define me.


----------



## ViKtoricus (Mar 31, 2014)

thepancreas11 said:


> I sometimes wonder if what I say really speaks harshly to people. I'm just wondering what kinds of things to avoid when I write a critique to make sure that I come across as constructive and honest simultaneously.



When people ask you for critique, don't be afraid to be blunt (just don't overdo it.).

When you give unsolicited critique, be a bit more delicate. Say things indirectly.

It's hard to tell you how it's done, but I can show you... Here's an example...



Writer: <writes something that's info-dumpy>

Bad critic: This is info-dumpy. Don't do it like that.



That's a no no. No matter how much you sandwich it with two positive comments (You have good voice. It's info dumpy. You have potential.), it WILL sound harsh.



This is how it's done...



Writer: <writes something that's info-dumpy>

Good critic: My, you certainly have quite the imagination. So vivid, in fact, that it's overwhelming. If you can just learn how to tone it down and ease us in with what background-information we need to know about this chapter, this story will read much better.


----------



## Bishop (Mar 31, 2014)

ViKtoricus said:


> Good critic: My, you certainly have quite the imagination. So vivid, in fact, that it's overwhelming. If you can just learn how to tone it down and ease us in with what background-information we need to know about this chapter, this story will read much better.



See, I think it depends entirely on the writer. This second version sounds incredibly condescending and patronizing. The first one was direct and tells me what's wrong. It doesn't pat me on the head, call me cute, and say something else is "much better." 

My opinion? Good critics say, "This didn't work for me, very info dumpy, consider revising."


----------



## ViKtoricus (Mar 31, 2014)

Bishop said:


> See, I think it depends entirely on the writer. This second version sounds incredibly condescending and patronizing. The first one was direct and tells me what's wrong. It doesn't pat me on the head, call me cute, and say something else is "much better."
> 
> My opinion? Good critics say, "This didn't work for me, very info dumpy, consider revising."





I disagree.

I think the mere fact that a person has the courtesy to try to be polite and sensitive to the writer's feelings will make his words more appreciated.


----------



## Bishop (Mar 31, 2014)

ViKtoricus said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I think the mere fact that a person has the courtesy to try to be polite and sensitive to the writer's feelings will make his words more appreciated.



That's fine, but the writer's feelings are not what he came to get a reading on. He came to get a reading on what works and what doesn't. I'm not looking for people to pat me on the back when I get a critique, I need to know what works and what doesn't.


----------



## Ariel (Mar 31, 2014)

As a writer I'm more likely to throw out your second critique, Vik, as patronizing and, frankly because it seems patronizing, rude.  I prefer the critiques I receive to be to the point and direct.  If I'm info-dumping and someone tells me I've got a vivid imagination I may not realize that I'm info-dumping.  

I find it better if the critique is direct and includes something for me to build on.

If you have to point out an info dump or something along those lines in a critique I would suggest simply answering a few questions.

1) Why is what you're pointing out a problem?

2) Is there a suggestion for making the problem better?

If I were critiquing an info dump (and it hasn't been pointed out yet) I would say, "This section is an info-dump.  It would flow better and be more accessible for readers if this information were dispersed throughout the text as description and/or dialogue."


----------



## kilroy214 (Mar 31, 2014)

I agree with Bishop on this matter. I feel like both the examples ViKtoricus provided are examples of bad critiques. Saying something blunt like "this is info dumpy, it doesn't work" by itself is bad, but provide me with your reason you feel this way and it becomes constructive. 
The good critic response sounds insulting to the reciever of the critique and sounds like your going out of your way to be as unblunt as possible. Even ViKtoricus sites right off the bat that being blunt is good to keep in mind when critiqueing.


----------



## shadowwalker (Apr 1, 2014)

Info-dumps are a common problem; this is typical of how I deal with a newer writer:

There seems to be an awful lot of information in this section, and I'm not convinced you need all of that. Some of it I think you could move into the previous sections (example, example); other parts don't seem necessary at all/at this point (example, example).

More experienced writers get a bit stronger response (Bit of an info-dump here - are you sure you need all this at this particular point?). A totally new writer would get a very gentle "I don't think you want all of this here" and some information on info-dumps, what they are, why to avoid them, etc.

I'm not trying to be their friend, their mentor, their cheerleader, or their god. I'm trying to help them become better writers.


----------



## bookmasta (Apr 1, 2014)

ViKtoricus said:


> Good critic: My, you certainly have quite the imagination. So vivid, in fact, that it's overwhelming. If you can just learn how to tone it down and ease us in with what background-information we need to know about this chapter, this story will read much better.



No. That's more like sugarcoating the truth. Writer's aren't children. You don't have to blunt. You don't have to brutal. Its not the end of the world if someone's work isn't that great. Every writer starts out somewhere. I'm still trying to figure out where this idea came from that writer can't handle honest feedback. Aside from my creative writing teacher when I was first starting out, I used to post my works on another forum when I completed them. At the time I also thought they were pretty great. And what happened? I got shot down. A lot. I also moved on from it because I knew that it was okay to suck. My point is criticism shouldn't watered down. If you find something in the plot or excerpt you like then pick it out. Tell said writer what you like, but also be honest about what should be fixed. The only way to learn is to gain understanding from mistakes so you can move on from them.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Apr 1, 2014)

I think I've actually learned more about people being honest and constructive even though they sound harsh. That's the best way to learn in my own opinion. This is because you save time, like my case where my work has been always been about style issues and grammar. I think by listening on how to go about it the message of the critique matters in the end. You trade new habits from old ones.


----------



## Kyle R (Apr 1, 2014)

More and more lately I'm leaning toward giving _emotional_ feedback, rather than _technical_ feedback.

That is to say, instead of pointing out things in the writing itself that I feel should be changed or corrected, I'll explain to the writer how different passages made me _feel _as a reader.

The reason I'm moving toward this approach: I've come to the conclusion that too many critiquers give _poor_ advice which they themselves believe is sound.

"This part is weak/wrong, and here is how you should fix it."

As much as the critiquer may believe in his/her advice, there's a possibility that the recommendation doesn't fit with the writer's style and/or intentions. 

In other words, there's a possibility that the critiquer is giving _bad_ advice.

So, in order to avoid such a thing, I like to point out how sections of the text made me feel. "I enjoyed this part.. This part confused me.. Things got boring here for me.. Here I began to wonder what happened to the protagonist..." And then, leave it up to the writer to decide whether or not they want to address and fix problem areas.

If they request recommendations or suggestions, _then_ I'll delve further. But I leave that choice up to the writer.

I try to avoid absolutes such as, "This is how you should fix it. First, you do this... then this..." (something I used to do in the past), because really, when this happens, a lot of the times it's just the critiquer trying to rewrite the piece in their own style.

"I hate first person. I like third person pieces better. They are superior. So, you should rewrite this all in first person, and it'll be better," for example.

It's not your job to do a rewrite, or imply one is required, unless the poster is asking for this.

Feel free to make suggestions, absolutely, but make it obvious that these are just opinions.

At some point the writer will have to learn how to rewrite and improve their own work. Spoon-feeding them your own preferences can be harmful on two levels: 1) it doesn't allow them to come up with solutions themselves; and 2) The solutions you provide, as much as you believe in them, may actually be wrong for the writer.

Just some thoughts to add to the discussion. :encouragement:


----------



## shadowwalker (Apr 1, 2014)

Absolutely agree - it should always be made clear that you are making suggestions only. The final decision has to be up to the author.


----------



## thepancreas11 (Apr 2, 2014)

I guess the moral is, let's all just agree that we're trying to be constructive here, and not vindictive. Be honest, and that'll do the trick. Got it.


----------

