I Can't Stand Being Critiqued--

[Atari]

There is a thread here similar to this, already, but it does not refer to the absolutely raw EMOTION I have when someone reviews something I write.

I'll be honest: I can't take criticism. I thought that once I admitted it, once I accepted it, that I could make it better.
But it's not a conscious, deliberate action.
When someone points out something in my writing that is wrong, I get defensive, and I am filled with dismay.

In an attempt to dull my emotion to criticism, I wrote something that I was not attached to. It was a spontaneous idea and meant nothing to me.
I send it to this girl I saw, and she corrected me.
It was all grammatical mistakes, some of them that I should have seen, myself.

And every time I saw a red mark on the screen, EVERY mistake she marked, EVERY WORD SHE SAID worked to kindle a remorseful rage within my chest.
I felt my jaw tighten, my eyes stared forward with blurred vision, seeing into nothing; my thoughts were empty, but the fury welling inside of me was real.

I could, AS I read the critique, observe my own anger increasing.

WHY!? Why do I take it so PERSONALLY? How can I detach myself from this?
She was a NICE girl, simply stating the problems, and she told me afterward that she enjoyed it; that it was descriptive and interesting and well written.

So why? Why was I so filled with dismay and regret and fury at my own foibles?

*Explodes*

[Cogito]

It's difficult, but necessary, to set aside your ego whenb you read a critique. Assume tat every negative remark has SOME element of truth to it tat you can learn from, and challenge yourself to find it.

After all, apart from critiques posted merely to meet a quota (usually obvious), te reviewer is trying to help you make your writing better.

[Atari]

Yes, I understand.
Part of the problem, though; is that I know the person is RIGHT. I'm not mad that they have done me wrong, but they have found fault with me. And they are correct.
I mean. . . do I have a bigger ego than I thought? Is it possible that I am actually a HUGELY conceited, arrogant prick, and I don't know it?

[DavidGil]

Best bet Atari is to remember that any critique given is an opinion and as such, an opinion cannot be right or wrong if it is given truthfully, as an opinion is never fact. I.e the person isn't saying what they really think for whatever reason.

And actually, if you're mad at yourself, does it not encourage you to better your writing? Key thing is to try and prevent that from being shown in any replies given to others and not make critiquers think you're angry at them (which can be hard considering the nature of the net).

Or yeah, you can just not post anything. But I don't think that helps achieve anything. Nobody is perfect and we all learn by doing, while receiving feedback.

But I will say one thing Atari. Writing isn't easy and there will always be detractors of your writing no matter how good it is, so if you want to make it in the business (if you're serious about forging a career in writing), then you need to be able to take criticism. Even the best authors like Dickens and others, alongside today's best sellers get criticised.

Other than the things mentioned, if you do not seek a career with writing, then might I suggest sharing your work but not asking for critiques? If you only want to share your work and write for your own enjoyment, then having people give critical or praising feedback isn't as necessary.

Hope this helps.

[Cogito]

Remember that finding faults in the writing is not finding fault with the writer.

[Atari]

Thanks, David, for the words of encouragement.
Actually, it's less like anger and more like dismay. I'm not mad with myself, necessarily, as much as I am disappointed, and frustrated. Anxious, even! All kinds of emotions bundled into one.
Frustration, doubt, resignation. I know for a FACT that I can do better, I don't have to strive, (and I'm referring to those times when they point out some minuscule, trivial mistake) yet it STILL makes me enter into a state of emotional turmoil.

I'm an oddball, though, so if no one can figure me out, it's alright.

I do hope to have a writing career, but at the same time, it feels like a fanciful, faraway dream.
I can't see myself actually becoming a writer. Hah! That's laughable. Wanting it won't make it happen. It takes the willingness to do hard work and dedication, two things I lack.
Still, it would be nice, pipe-dream notwithstanding.



Edit: Cogito, you may have said the one thing that may fix everything, for me. I am not my writing. I had not thought of it, like that.
Hmm. . . .

[DavidGil]

Actually, there is one more point I want to make:

You can't and shouldn't try to please everyone. Maybe write for yourself first and fore-most (think that's how you spell it). Take what you need and don't take the parts you don't need.

Edit: To a certain degree, I can relate to how you feel.

[marina]

WHY!? Why do I take it so PERSONALLY? How can I detach myself from this? ... Why was I so filled with dismay and regret and fury at my own foibles?
*Explodes* Very simply, it's due to cognitive distortion. Google that term. You'll see what I mean.

[Leaka]

Maybe it isn't the critique you are upset at.
Maybe it's disappointment in yourself.
Every mistake, I should have seen that, how did that person see that?
Every red mark, Why did I mess up this bad?
Maybe it isn't the critique maybe it's disappointment in you self.

[Atari]

Very simply, it's due to cognitive distortion. Google that term. You'll see what I mean.



This FEELS like it hits the nail on the head; unfortunately, I see no way of ridding myself of this malady.

[TWErvin2]

Atari,

The bottom line is that until you are able to accept criticism with respect to your writing, you will struggle to succeed as a writer. Some of that may vary with your goals.

Nevertheless, it will slow your growth and skill in the area of writing. It will make you impossible for an editor or an agent to work with.

People can give suggestions, but in the end it is you that will have to get over it, will have to change, and truly want to change--and work at it.

Good luck, as I suspect there will be more than a few frustrating points along the way.

Terry

[Rei]

This FEELS like it hits the nail on the head; unfortunately, I see no way of ridding myself of this malady.

Cognitive behavioural therapy and "thinking happy thoughts".

[Kas]

Atari,

I don't think you are arrogant. I think you're a perfectionist. Somehow you've come to expect perfection from yourself, so when the writing isn't perfect you feel this overwhelming dismay.

I can relate in a limited way. I'm a terrible perfectionist myself, but I also know that my writing will never be perfect. Every time I finish a chapter segment and look over it, I can't help but feel that it's never good enough. When it comes back to me here, covered in red, that's just another nail in the coffin:(. Every time I see these flaws, I too, am filled with dismay.

I've read so many great books in my life... Everyone who knows me IRL tells me I'm a great writer. But I know it's not true... yet. I can't help but feel that it should be great. I have all of the knowledge in my head to write a best seller. So why the hell can't I just WRITE one?? Why doesn't it ever come out right? Because writing is complicated. It will take years to produce the work that I expect from myself. And every criticism I receive along the way fills me with equal parts joy and dismay.

Seeing red all over your work tells you that you've got a long row to hoe... and that just sucks. But at the same it shows you the way to improve, which is awesome.Every useful critique, every time you know they're right, take it as one step forward to perfection. Your writing will never be perfect, though. As a perfectionist myself, I find it hard to swallow... But I take pleasure in progress. The joy I feel, knowing that I'm getting better by the day as I participate here, overpowers those negative feelings.

Writing is bitter sweet. It's only a major problem when you can't appreciate the sweet. So take a deep breath:p when you see those red notes, and think of how much better your writing will be when you take them to heart.

[Mcarpenter]

Laughter is the best medicine. Try to have a sense of humor about it. That's what I do. :D

Oooh, in your original post, you spelled "personally" wrong. :p LOL, I'm kidding. It's spelled right. :)

When I was running a graphic arts business, I once had a client who was so tactless. He would constanly say things like "The S looks like an intestine" or "the T looks like a goat's head and the E looks like some sort of hideous carnivorous animal about to eat". Laughing about it was the only way I got through it.

Here's a link to my favorite place to get jokes, that will hopefully put you in a better, brighter mood.
http://www.rd.com/clean-jokes-and-laughs

[Etan Isar]

Oh, poor Atari...:( I have the same problem. It's why I rarely if ever post prose online. I just get so upset:mad: at all the things I did wrong. I've never gotten cognitive therapy. I don't think it's that serious. Instead, I post much shorter projects (though not anyless difficult), like poems. After the eighty-sixth time I got upset over "negative" feedback, I began to have an easier time of it. So my suggestion is to just keep posting/sending out work to be reviewed or critiqued. I think that, eventually, you'll get over this on your own.

[Speedy]

When someone points out something in my writing that is wrong, I get defensive, and I am filled with dismay.

I just get so upset:mad: at all the things I did wrongWhen i see the "red" of criticism and fixing up of, i never think of what i did as "wrong" just an area that i can agprove on.

Unless you actually go to a die-hard professional, is it really wrong? (IF its SPAG, i wouldnt worry, you can easily fix that, and learn)

[Etan Isar]

When i see the "red" of criticism and fixing up of, i never think of what i did as "wrong" just an area that i can agprove on.

Unless you actually go to a die-hard professional, is it really wrong? (IF its SPAG, i wouldnt worry, you can easily fix that, and learn)

In response to the second quote, I was joking mainly. Your attitude is a very good one.

[Dalouise]

Atari,

I don't think you are arrogant. I think you're a perfectionist. Somehow you've come to expect perfection from yourself, so when the writing isn't perfect you feel this overwhelming dismay.

I can relate in a limited way. I'm a terrible perfectionist myself, but I also know that my writing will never be perfect. Every time I finish a chapter segment and look over it, I can't help but feel that it's never good enough. When it comes back to me here, covered in red, that's just another nail in the coffin:(. Every time I see these flaws, I too, am filled with dismay.



I can also relate to that. I had a childhood with a perfectionist father for whom nothing was ever good enough and first prizes were expected. Some of it rubbed off on me and a lack of self-confidence stopped me from even attempting a number of things that I now wish I had done. I now compete in a (gentle) sport which is highly subjective in terms of the results as it is the judge's opinion on the day. Every time I walk into the ring, I am setting myself up for failure and public humiliation, at least that it how it can feel. After fifteen years of it, I am mellowing although some success has made me feel more "part of the gang".

I am hoping that the same will apply to writing and at least online reviews are less public. I still feel the need for a small success to make me view the red ink in a more positive light, though. Then I think of some top sportsmen and women who still train all the time under the supervision of a professional, despite world and olympic medals.

As someone once said to me, "to increase your success rate, you need to first increase your failure rate." I mulled over that phrase for weeks before the penny dropped. ;)

[HKB]

If you ever want to be a good writer you have to be ego-less when it comes to your writing. You have to decide what's important. Is it important for you to learn and become a good writer, or are you using writing for ego rewards? If the latter, find something else to do that will draw more attention to yourself in a positive way since that's what you want.
When you feel negatively about what someone has said about your writing or while critiquing it might help to sit down and write for yourself what really bothers you about what they said. Don't ignore that it does, just try to realize that it doesn't really matter. Immediately after that begin writing again. Do not let it stop you.

[Lemex]

The main thing is: how do you feel when reviewing yourself?

I know many people who say that a writer who hates criticism is wasting his time writing; but honestly, I think critique is something you can learn to take.

[Etan Isar]

The main thing is: how do you feel when reviewing yourself?

I know many people who say that a writer who hates criticism is wasting his time writing; but honestly, I think critique is something you can learn to take.

It's defintely possible. You just need to keep at it.

[diabolic321]

I'm not knowledgeable at this, but I've found that the story I wrote was much better after receiving some critique and correcting the errors when compared to the work before giving it up to the wolves... :) If you get too defensive when others review your work, you could try to put the work down for a month or so, let the ideas settle down, the enthusiasm cool down. Maybe then you won't be so defensive of your own work? In my opinion, one thing is certain - you won't get better if nobody reviews your work. The reviews must be harsh, intelligent, reasonable. The reviewer shouldn't beat around the bush or try to save your feelings. Family members will probably be useless for this :) Oh, well, doesn't matter in my case because my family don't know English anyway :)

[crashbang]

I'm a bit like you. Im constantly in doubt weather I can really become a successful writer, especially at 18 when I've only really recently started to write and learn. But having peoples opinion is vital. You are writing, essentially, for other people, therefore, you have to learn to take criticism. I look over stuff I have done in years past and cringe- nowadays, its a bit better, but only because I learnt from other people various methods to improve.

Don't shy away from criticism if you hate it, because that wont help. Look for the hatchet man, the one who will point out things he doesnt like and generally, rip your work to bits. Of course you dont have to rip it to bits yourself, but some of what he/she says will be true once you think about it, and it will improve your writing.

So my advice is: look for the hatchet man. look for criticism.

Hell, its why Im on this site.

[Atari]

First, thank you for the kind and helpful and empathetic responses! It really does give me something to think about, but it also makes me wonder if some of you know exactly what is going on in my head. (Even I don't, usually)

Someone asked, "How do you feel when you review your own work?"

Well, the problem with that is-- I generally write until I'm satisfied, you see, and once I'm satisfied, it seems that others should be, as well. Then when they mark my wrongs, I explode and want to throw my laptop across the room in frustration.

I hope that, should I post anything her for review, I will receive kind reviews, as that is the only solace for me during these trying times.

But, yeah, I'll see what I can do.

[Etan Isar]

First, thank you for the kind and helpful and empathetic responses! It really does give me something to think about, but it also makes me wonder if some of you know exactly what is going on in my head. (Even I don't, usually)

Someone asked, "How do you feel when you review your own work?"

Well, the problem with that is-- I generally write until I'm satisfied, you see, and once I'm satisfied, it seems that others should be, as well. Then when they mark my wrongs, I explode and want to throw my laptop across the room in frustration.

I hope that, should I post anything her for review, I will receive kind reviews, as that is the only solace for me during these trying times.

But, yeah, I'll see what I can do.

But consider, you do not know everything. (neither do others, of course, but...) So what satisfies you is not necessarily going to satisfy someone more "knowledgable". I totally understand what you are saying. I used to have exactly that same issue--and sometimes I still do. It's something you have to learn to get past. And you will.


And kind reviews do help.

[Speedy]

Well, the problem with that is-- I generally write until I'm satisfied, you see, and once I'm satisfied, it seems that others should be, as well. Then when they mark my wrongs, I explode and want to throw my laptop across the room in frustration.

Its just not possible to make everyone happy...

[Atari]

Its just not possible to make everyone happy...


Yeah, but I can tell the difference in when someone is stating an opinion (E.G. The 'standard' of writing is not using italics for thought, and anything else is frowned upon) and fact. (Periods go at the end of declarative sentences)

When people are right, they are right, and it drives me up the wall.
Or, did-- I haven't been critiqued very recently and I hope I can endure it with more grace and calm than I have been able to.


Incidentally, is this your comment:

"loveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee this freaken song!!!!!!!"

[Ghosts in Latin]

I've a question for you. You said that you know when people are right, but still you're filled with fury.

Do you feel said fury at the person? Is your anger directed toward the critic for having the audacity to insult you?

Or is it directed toward yourself? Do you get angry at the fact that you've done your work, and you feel satisfied by it, but it's still not good enough?

I think knowing things like that will help.

[Atari]

I've a question for you. You said that you know when people are right, but still you're filled with fury.

Do you feel said fury at the person? Is your anger directed toward the critic for having the audacity to insult you?

Or is it directed toward yourself? Do you get angry at the fact that you've done your work, and you feel satisfied by it, but it's still not good enough?

I think knowing things like that will help.

No, I am not angry at the reviewer.
I am not really even angry with MYSELF, necessarily. . . .

I will think for a moment and then tell you what I have discovered. . . .


Well, here, in a story format, is basically what goes on in my head:


I was nervous when I clicked on the message, and immediately my heart sank when, in my peripheral vision, I saw the red marks.
Scrolling down, I looked at the first mistake and a wave of annoyance and frustration rushed through my chest.
My eyes kept lowering, and there, midway through, was another mistake. This one I should have saw. I should have noticed it. I should not have submitted it without fixing that. Why did I not see it?
Finally, I see the last corrected error and, at this point, my lips are twitching, the corners of my eyes wrinkling as my countenance twists in fury and anger.
My upper lip peels back to show my gnashed teeth, "I can't believe this!" I shout at my computer screen, "Stupid mistakes! How can I be a great writer if I constantly make these retarded errors!" I was now standing and leaning forward as I harshly berated myself at the top of my lungs, "I'm supposed to be good, but that's obviously not the case!"

The door to my room suddenly opened, causing me to quickly turn and backpedal, then clasp my hands behind my back and stand still. My mother just stared at me.
"What are you yelling at?"
"Uh. . . sorry."



And that's basically it. Even I don't know EXACTLY what it is that bothers me.

[Ghosts in Latin]

I would say you're angry with yourself. Angry that you didn't catch that mistake, that you didn't do something that someone else had to point out.

I think you get angry because you know whomever is making corrections isn't doing it personally, and objectively. Since they're not just baselessly slandering your work, and giving you objective critisism, it seems like it's a clear fault on your part.

Someone else said (I don't quite remember the name of the poster) that you hold yourself to a high standard of perfection. Like you said, you don't haphhazardly submit your work, but you write it until you're personally satisfied with it, and someone else pointing out possible mistakes shatters that satisfaction, and raises the bar for perfection.

I'd compare it to studying for a test, and being very confident about it. Waiting for the teacher to pass it back is done in proud anxiety, even, just to see that 'A'. Then, when the test has returned, it's seen to have a 'B-' on it.

I've also found that a lot of emotions, for one reason or another, turn into anger. Anger seems to be that "vent" emotion, rather than one in an of itself. In this case, perhaps for disapointment (at your work not being as good as you thought it was) and anxiety (because every time your writing is corrected, it seems to pull you further away from being an author)?

Also, this is just my psudo-psychological rambling, so don't quote me on any of it. I just know, when dealing with an emotion, it really helps to analyze it and know why it's happening.

[Etan Isar]

I think a better way to phrase it is that you(hypothetical "you", not directed at anyone in particular) like to think that you hold yourself to a higher standard. You see work riddled with errors, and you think: "Gosh... I would never submit crap like that." Then, twenty minutes later, you find you mispelled "the" as "te" four times in a row. Ouch.:mad:

At least, that's been my experience.... sometimes...

[Atari]

I would say you're angry with yourself. Angry that you didn't catch that mistake, that you didn't do something that someone else had to point out.

I think you get angry because you know whomever is making corrections isn't doing it personally, and objectively. Since they're not just baselessly slandering your work, and giving you objective critisism, it seems like it's a clear fault on your part.

Someone else said (I don't quite remember the name of the poster) that you hold yourself to a high standard of perfection. Like you said, you don't haphhazardly submit your work, but you write it until you're personally satisfied with it, and someone else pointing out possible mistakes shatters that satisfaction, and raises the bar for perfection.

I'd compare it to studying for a test, and being very confident about it. Waiting for the teacher to pass it back is done in proud anxiety, even, just to see that 'A'. Then, when the test has returned, it's seen to have a 'B-' on it.

I've also found that a lot of emotions, for one reason or another, turn into anger. Anger seems to be that "vent" emotion, rather than one in an of itself. In this case, perhaps for disapointment (at your work not being as good as you thought it was) and anxiety (because every time your writing is corrected, it seems to pull you further away from being an author)?

Also, this is just my psudo-psychological rambling, so don't quote me on any of it. I just know, when dealing with an emotion, it really helps to analyze it and know why it's happening.

I really believe that you have nailed it, here.

Particularly the part about being pulled further away from being an author.

It's like each mistake is one step further from my goal, one more nail in the coffin of my success.

Perhaps I should hold myself to an extremely low standard, not thinking that I am good at all, and that I can only improve.

I am glad that you have defined it so exactly. It's like you hit that 'sweet' spot where I am forced to say, "Yes! That's a facsimile of what I am feeling!"

[Ghosts in Latin]

I'm glad I could help. :) Keeping in mind that there's always room for improvement is a good thing to do, regardless of how well someone does something. Just be sure not to think badly of yourself. That's the other, not-so-good extreme.

[Paul_V]

Huh. I like this thread. You see, this is the kind of thread where I think I can give some helpful imput, since I'm your complete opposite. I'm never satisfied with the quality of my work. When I submit it to somebody, it's because I'm tired of reviewing it, because I was asked to, or because I don't have the time to do it myself. When it returns, I expect to find corrections. If the other person doesn't point out mistakes or things that can be improved, then he/she is either too nice or lacks the required knowledge to make a valid critique. Either way, that person is useless to me and will not be seeing my work again until it's published.

My feelings when I see the red marks on my sheet are satisfaction and joy, since I'm a step closer to perfection. You see, I never make the same mistake twice. Ever. Every time I discover I have failed at something, I engrave that moment in my memory. And it stays there forever, so that next time, I will not do so again. This means that every mistake I find places me one step closer to success.

Something I have noticed, in keeping with the Psychology trend of this thread, is that certain types of personality find it hard to accept criticism. These people usually consider their feelings over logic when making decisions, so they cannot become emotionally detached from their work. It's very common in artists and other "sensitive" or "emotional" people. Ask yourself this: Do you become emotionally attached to things? Do you find it easy to empathise with others? Do you prefer to follow your heart instead of your head? If you answered yes to one or more of these questions, then it's highly possible that you're a Feeling person (Yes, yes, I am quoting Myers-Briggs, sue me).

[Bob Magness]

I understand that you wish to stop feeling this way when your work is critiqued but you may not be able to. It might just be your nature. That is ok, we all have our faults, we just have to learn to make do with them. I would say that the more you get upset with critiques the more you should put your work up to be critiqued. Perhaps you will become desensitized. Just a thought.

[HKB]

Something I have noticed, in keeping with the Psychology trend of this thread, is that certain types of personality find it hard to accept criticism. These people usually consider their feelings over logic when making decisions, so they cannot become emotionally detached from their work. It's very common in artists and other "sensitive" or "emotional" people. Ask yourself this: Do you become emotionally attached to things? Do you find it easy to empathise with others? Do you prefer to follow your heart instead of your head? If you answered yes to one or more of these questions, then it's highly possible that you're a Feeling person (Yes, yes, I am quoting Myers-Briggs, sue me).

What if you "logically" find your work flawless and the criticism offends you? Maybe head people would be more likely to be offended because they're less capable at dealing with their emotions directly or honestly. A feeling-person may be better at recognizing and admitting sensitive reactions, but also better at moving on from them.
Everyone will feel some degree of threat from criticism, but you have to learn to deal with it and move on, develop resilience, and value writing well over flattery.

[Atari]

I am a-- how would I define myself?

A vessel of the myriad and sundry of the continuum of human emotion.


I become emotionally attached to things, but I do not find it easy to empathize with others.
I NEVER follow my heart, but I rarely follow my head. Instead, I follow unthinking whim or impulse.

I'm a fairly complicated person, but I wish I had YOUR outlook on things.

[Atari]

Where's the delete button?

[Paul_V]

What if you "logically" find your work flawless and the criticism offends you? Maybe head people would be more likely to be offended because they're less capable at dealing with their emotions directly or honestly. A feeling-person may be better at recognizing and admitting sensitive reactions, but also better at moving on from them.
Everyone will feel some degree of threat from criticism, but you have to learn to deal with it and move on, develop resilience, and value writing well over flattery.

I disagree. You can logically find your work flawless, yes, but if you are a logical person, then you will understand that what you are feeling is not helping you improve and you will not lose your composure. Actually, head people would be less likely to be offended because, by definition, they give their emotions less weight when making a decision. If you are a feeling person, then you value your emotions more than logic, so if criticism offends you, then it's more likely that you will listen to that over logic.

And I agree with you, "learn to deal with it and move on, develop resilience, and value writing well over flattery" is only logical that if you want to improve as a writer, so taking offense at criticism is counter-productive.

Atari: Actually, following your whims could be considered following your heart, depending on the nature of those impulses. If they are based on feelings or emotions, then you're following your heart.

Oh, and I don't really think you wish you had my outlook. It took a lot of failing and trauma, something I wouldn't recommend to anybody.

[Atari]

I disagree. You can logically find your work flawless, yes, but if you are a logical person, then you will understand that what you are feeling is not helping you improve and you will not lose your composure. Actually, head people would be less likely to be offended because, by definition, they give their emotions less weight when making a decision. If you are a feeling person, then you value your emotions more than logic, so if criticism offends you, then it's more likely that you will listen to that over logic.

And I agree with you, "learn to deal with it and move on, develop resilience, and value writing well over flattery" is only logical that if you want to improve as a writer, so taking offense at criticism is counter-productive.

Atari: Actually, following your whims could be considered following your heart, depending on the nature of those impulses. If they are based on feelings or emotions, then you're following your heart.

Oh, and I don't really think you wish you had my outlook. It took a lot of failing and trauma, something I wouldn't recommend to anybody.

True, and I considered that for several moments before posting it, but in the end, I realize that it really IS just impulses.
It's completely lacking thought or real feeling. It's a random, spontaneous compulsion that I follow without any rhyme or reason.
Even when you follow your heart, there is generally some THOUGHT involved.

But in any case, I think what needs to be said has already been said best by Ghosts in Latin.

[Paul_V]

Well, when I said "follow your heart," I meant "do as you feel." If you feel angry and you resort to physical or verbal violence, for example, then you are following your heart, even if you did it on a spur of the moment, without thinking on what you were doing. Hence why most legal systems reduce the sentence when you murder someone in the heat of an argument, because your emotions took over you and you lost control. Truly an extreme example, but you get the point. But yes, I agree that Ghosts in Latin has indeed said it best.

[woahkatie]

Atari, i feel the exact same way. when i write, its all that i think about eachday and how i truely feel about someone. and it hurts me, when someone says that they dont like it or has to point out what is wrong with it, because its my own thoughts, and its my own personal opinion. and i try to avoid politics because others dont respect others opinions. but i guess i'm going to find politics and people like that in any shape or form. and i cant stop running away from it, i have to grow and learn from them critisizing me. even if their intentions are good.

[Castlesofsand]

I started seriously critiquing pieces about 3 months ago. Doesn't seem that long when considering how long i've been writing.

lol i used to argue against every critique, every point. Argue my side, explain why i meant what i mean, why my words had to be used not theirs.

But then I realised something. That if a reader(well more than one) didn't understand what i was saying, well then it needed to be reworded.

It's hard to let go of a story you put your heart into, where you think its the best you can do and someone does the slash through it or colours it red or bolds it. But it does help if you let it.

We are here to learn, each of us has something to teach someone else. Or that's how i look at it now.

I also learnt to accept that my critiques aren't law either and that my suggestions aren't necessarily the best ones. So i look at how the writer said it and learn from them. It's hard to let go both ways. but if you want to improve, really want to improve, you have to see both sides, look at it as an editor would. And when you critique, dont' just look for the negative, you teach nothing that way, you show the good also. This is a writers' forum, not a place to showcase and leave. You can learn a lot from people here, if you let them show you.

my thoughts of course can vary from yours.

happy writing

[bfaye]

I don't like being critiqued because I am always a little shy about sharing my ideas and my work. I am usually embarrassed if something I produced totally sucks and end up discouraging myself from writing in general. I am attempting to get past this and hopefully come out with something I am proud of.

[Mat Growcott]

The initial problem with being critiqued is that people like to think their work is the best they can possibly do. To then find there are problems with it is upsetting, because you have plans for everything you write, in some way.

The second problem is: this is the internet. I know from years of posting various works on forums that there are two inevitable truths.

1. Hundreds of people really do not understand the very basics of critique, of the purpose behind things. When you post something that has taken months to write, cast, produce and at last, has been uploaded you will feel angry when the first response is: 'lol. u must hav 2 much tym. dis is sad.'

While nothing that extreme is likely to happen here, we're all of one mind and share a similar hobby, it can be frustrating to read 'Ya know, this was wrong, this was wrong and this...sucked'. It is important that you should be brutally honest and both positive AND negative. People generally don't mind being shown what you believe is wrong with their work if they know there are things you found right about it.

2. Everyone has an opinion. And while every single one is valid to a point, you develop a certain maturity in how you take reviews that means you sift out certain things. You, and only you, fully understand your work, the emotions you felt while writing and the exact thoughts going through your head as you wrote. If someone has a problem with something you felt worked, seriously question whether it did. If you STILL think it works then develop it. You won't please everybody, but at least you'll have work that you are happy with.

You are the writer and critique is something you SHOULD use to develop your style. But don't let someone suggest you change that style if you feel it works. Take on board criticism, but take it all with a pinch of salt.

[bullets4booze]

Without harsh feedback you'll never strive to improve and after years of investing time in your stories the industry will tell you you suck. So yeah, it's good to know where you stand all the time. And it also matters who critiques your work. Because it may be brilliant but some jerk washout will tell you it's bad simply because he/she's an idiot or too closed-minded on their own style. And on the other hand you can't assume everyone's an idiot. If 1 out of 10 people think your work is good you need to reach that rank of people who enjoyed it. :)

[lynneandlynn]

Atari,

You said you write and re-write something until you feel completely satisfied with it before submitting it to be critiqued and then when it's not as perfect as you feel it is, you get angry and frustrated.

My advice? Stick with the first draft, don't correct it all, and submit *that* one for critique. And then fix it with those suggestions (whichever ones work) and re-write it. Then submit it again. And so on. Until both you and the people you're asking for critiques like it.

Don't write a piece to perfection in your own mind if you want it critiqued...it's just a setup for failure from the beginning.

I did that with one piece before and only one piece..and I was so devastated and crushed that I stopped writing for about a month. And then I realized what I just advised you to do...and everything has worked out for me since then.

~Lynn

[Phantasmal Reality]

Nobody likes being critiqued, especially by people who don't say one nice thing about it. However, that's life. As people have already mentioned, everyone has detractors--even the greats. I know that doesn't make it any easier, but I think the reason it's hard is because of the way one looks at his or her writing.

I think we all put our work out there with a secret dream in the back of our minds that it'll be great and people will have nothing but praise for it. The nervousness comes from your better judgment telling you that such a dream is just that--a dream. If you get your hopes up, it hurts when they aren't realized. The answer is simple: refine your hopes.

As someone said, don't even try to please everyone. You won't. Moreover, you can't. You might as well chase a rainbow. What you should focus on is pleasing your target audience. Your target audience can be as broad as "all fans of fantasy fiction", or as specific as "people who've been through what I've been through". Just focus on what you have to say with your work, and let fate worry about the rest. Chances are if it's important and moving to you, someone else out there will resonate with it too. In fact, lots of people probably will. :) Don't worry about the ones who don't. Maybe they didn't get it, maybe they don't like your style, or maybe they just don't like the premise of your story. If that's the case, oh well. They probably weren't the ones you were trying to reach anyway. ^_^

I find the best way to take critiques is with a dose of humility. You may be good, even very good, but you can always be better. Don't take a critique as an attack on you, or even your work. Take it as advice. Listen to it, honestly think about it, and then decide whether or not to accept it. You don't always have to accept it. Honestly, not everyone's critiques will be fair, enlightened, or even helpful. Listen to what they have to say, but believe in yourself--don't just assume that they necessarily know more than you do and are always right. Just don't take it too far and get arrogant. :rolleyes:

My last bit of advice is to critique others' works. Being on the other side will probably help you realize that people are not attacking you personally when they criticize your work. Even the people who don't say anything nice about your story may really mean it when they say they liked it at the end of their critique. :p

[lynneandlynn]

phantasmal,
You make a very good point. It's very important to critique others so that you understand that there's nothing personal about the critiquing process itself.

~Lynn

[Prettyroser]

I suppose I just don't get the idea of posting a work on a writing forum that encourages people to comment on others work and then being offended when people comment on it. It seems like if I can't stand someone critiquing my work than I shouldn't post it on a writing forum.

However, it's good that you are trying to deal with your issue.

[lynneandlynn]

Prettyroser,

He isn't offended by the comments people give him.. he's angry and frustrated with *himself* for not being able to conform to the high expectations of the writers around him. He's trying to deal with his anger at himself- he isn't angry at the people writing the critiques.

[x_raichelle_x]

I think what you may find helpful Atari, is that the people who critique your work on here don't know all that much about you, nobody is criticisng you as a person, just pointing out our views as a reader, on what might make your writing more appealing to us. But don't forget that we may not neccessarily be your target audience, & that we as writers ourselves know how it feels to be critiqued. Don't lose your writing style because others can point out faults with it - lots of amazing writers have obvious flaws, which they are most probably aware of; but it helps to define their writing & make it their own. In my opinion, John Fowles who wrote the French Lieutenants Woman, was an awful writer & none of it works very well together, but the book is widely regarded as an accomplished piece.
Just keep writing if it makes you happy, don't let the fear of critism stop your enjoyment of it though. Some mistakes are better left un-corrected :)
x

[Colonel Marksman]

I was nervous when I clicked on the message, and immediately my heart sank when, in my peripheral vision, I saw the red marks.
Scrolling down, I looked at the first mistake and a wave of annoyance and frustration rushed through my chest.
My eyes kept lowering, and there, midway through, was another mistake. This one I should have saw. I should have noticed it. I should not have submitted it without fixing that. Why did I not see it?
Finally, I see the last corrected error and, at this point, my lips are twitching, the corners of my eyes wrinkling as my countenance twists in fury and anger.
My upper lip peels back to show my gnashed teeth, "I can't believe this!" I shout at my computer screen, "Stupid mistakes! How can I be a great writer if I constantly make these retarded errors!" I was now standing and leaning forward as I harshly berated myself at the top of my lungs, "I'm supposed to be good, but that's obviously not the case!"

The door to my room suddenly opened, causing me to quickly turn and backpedal, then clasp my hands behind my back and stand still. My mother just stared at me.
"What are you yelling at?"
"Uh. . . sorry."

I will tell you up front, I am an extremely hard critic. I have difficulty getting past the first page of some Stephen King books. I thought movies like Wanted and the Rambo series is total crap. I even call the Matrix dry.

Atari, this was what tipped me into joining. This here... is beautiful. I made sure telling you this was my second-ever post on this forum (next to introducing myself). In fact, I believe you are a few steps ahead of me in my own style and word usage. I recognize my style of writing anywhere, and I've only seen it used before once (and this author was published, don't remember the name). I think I will learn things from you.

My writer senses can detect that we have things in common, with some night-day differences. Unlike you, I love critiques, harsh or praise. It allows me to know where I'm strong and weak, and I take it as an opportunity to get better.

Also unlike you, I get all angsty about harsh criticism I know is right. In fact, I have considered dropping writing and even suicide (to a small extent) due to a large number of critiques I have gotten recently that I have been longing for over a year.

I think you should look at your anger in a more positive light. People may try to tell you to calm down, deal with it, learn to get happy, etc., well, here's my suggestion:
use it.
Like you, harsh critiques bring out the writing monster in me. You took hold of that passion and wrote this piece that details your anger. Passion for art can be utilized like the Dark Side of the Force. It brings out that inner thing stored in our hearts that we never would know was there, and it possesses our minds and flows through the keyboard. My writer senses tell me that you even used the thesaurus to write this little piece, am I correct? Your determination to show just what you were feeling (not tell, show) has driven you.

When I read your first post, I told myself, "He cannot take criticism? Then he can be no author." But upon closer inspection from reading your feelings, I now understand that you DO care. You care as much as--probably more-- passionately than I do about critiques and the struggle to get better.


Your passion for perfection in the craft of writing is unmatched to anyone I had ever seen.


God bless the talent. ;)

[lynneandlynn]

Bleh Colonel. Reading your post made me reread Atari's example and I have to stop myself from messing with it now >< It didn't bother me until you said it was beautiful, which for some reason in my mind translated as you thinking it was perfect. And no writing is ever perfect, though it can be beautiful. I dunno. Weird.

Anyway, I'd disagree with the assessment that authors can't take criticism. Some of the most famous authors on the market deal with harsh criticism every day and I'm sure some of them rant and rage against the critics because it *hurts* them. I used to be one of those people who couldn't take criticism at all. But I physically forced myself to work on handling critiques for five consecutive years until I could handle them with only a modicum of self-deprecation.

~Lynn

[Atari]

Bleh Colonel. Reading your post made me reread Atari's example and I have to stop myself from messing with it now >< It didn't bother me until you said it was beautiful, which for some reason in my mind translated as you thinking it was perfect. And no writing is ever perfect, though it can be beautiful. I dunno. Weird.

Anyway, I'd disagree with the assessment that authors can't take criticism. Some of the most famous authors on the market deal with harsh criticism every day and I'm sure some of them rant and rage against the critics because it *hurts* them. I used to be one of those people who couldn't take criticism at all. But I physically forced myself to work on handling critiques for five consecutive years until I could handle them with only a modicum of self-deprecation.

~Lynn

You shouldn't speak with so much pride, Lynn.

You don't like the idea that I could have written a paragraph that held no grammatical mistakes or poor descriptions or similes.
It makes you feel inferior, which you are not, obviously.

I didn't write it, anyhow, as an example or to show off (that is, it is probably not good enough to use in showing off, since I'm still a mediocre writer) but because I was demonstrating the way I feel when I receive a critique.

In the end, I think he said it was 'beautiful' because he felt that I was using my raw emotion as a filter and boon to my writing. Maybe he felt my passion when he read it.

But 'perfect' is often subjective when dealing with art of any form, whether it be writing or painting.
A sentence that you find boring could inspire another person.

I mean, right? We all agree with that, don't we?

Oh, and in answer to the Colonel, I did not use a thesaurus. Upon looking through the post, the only word that one MIGHT need a thesaurus to find would be 'countenance,' which is a word I have known for a while, now, and would not have needed a thesaurus to find.

[lazerus reborn]

Am not sure if this has been said, ill admit i never read the last three pages :rolleyes:

This is in no way phsyco babble,
This is the way i have got this far in life, its just relaxing,
//before s/he starts,
Focus on each breath and clear your mind, call it egotistic, but forget everything, and ignore whats being said on a concious level and focus on your breathing, i got my heart rate to 50bmps then went hazy.
It helps alot in panic situations, and other high mental stress
(not to that extent i did it that was just stupid)

stop then ask her to start, this will leave you clear minded and focused, but you should still be relaxed. Thiers medical reason-ing for this but its too long winded.

it should help, but everyones different.

cheers cb

[xxtake_controlxx]

But 'perfect' is often subjective when dealing with art of any form, whether it be writing or painting.
A sentence that you find boring could inspire another person.

I mean, right? We all agree with that, don't we?


I was reading this post, and I DO have a response, but first, I just wanted to comment on what I quoted above. I think that is extremely well articulated and hits the nail on the head. It actually reminds me of the preface to The Picture of Dorian Gray, where Oscar Wilde basically rants about art. But that's another story. I just wanted to say that what you said there is perfectly true, and instead of just saying it, you should take that to heart.

When you receive a critique - that's not spelling or grammar based - it may not hold true for everyone. Something someone finds many flaws in can be perfect to someone else. That doesn't mean you should IGNORE the critique, because what others say - more often than not - can make your writing better. But it doesn't mean what you write is bad. It just means that it can be better.

And, the way I think about it (because it's the way I comment) is that when people comment, it's because they find potential. I know I'm probably overgeneralizing that statement, but that's besides the point. If your writing had no potential, people wouldn't take the time to read it, let alone spend the time writing a critique. It's not that you did something wrong, it's that you could do something to make your writing better. They comment because they find a connection to your writing, because they like something they see, and they want to see it become as good as it possibly can. It's not because they don't like you, or don't like your writing, but it's because they care. They care enough to see your writing improve. They care about your writing.

Along the lines of SPaG, though, mistakes are always made. I have never read something - especially a first draft of something - where there wasn't a SPaG mistake, or, if not a mistake, something that is slightly awkward that could be easily fixed. (Much like the sentence I just wrote.) Anyway, everyone makes mistakes. No one is perfect. You wouldn't have put yourself on a site like this if you thought it was perfect. And yes, corrections are not easy to read. I know that I always feel the need to explain myself, and I do. It makes things a bit easier. I mean, it's always going to be hard, but I guess just remember that people are commenting because they care about what you wrote, not because they think what you wrote is horrible.

That helps me.

[Etan Isar]

You shouldn't speak with so much pride, Lynn.

You don't like the idea that I could have written a paragraph that held no grammatical mistakes or poor descriptions or similes.
It makes you feel inferior, which you are not, obviously.

I didn't write it, anyhow, as an example or to show off (that is, it is probably not good enough to use in showing off, since I'm still a mediocre writer) but because I was demonstrating the way I feel when I receive a critique.

In the end, I think he said it was 'beautiful' because he felt that I was using my raw emotion as a filter and boon to my writing. Maybe he felt my passion when he read it.

But 'perfect' is often subjective when dealing with art of any form, whether it be writing or painting.
A sentence that you find boring could inspire another person.

I mean, right? We all agree with that, don't we?



That's the way I interpreted his comment. The passage is not perfect; there were several mistakes. But I do agree with the colonel that your heart is in the right place. Getting angry at yourself means you care, and from the passage, I think it's clear you're angry because you care about writing, not because you care about looking bad in front of others... which has been the reasoning behind many self-recriminations I've had the displeasure of hearing. I think that it's also nice for other newer writers who might read this thread, because they can see clearly that they aren't the only ones feeling such emotions.

[RomanticRose]

For me, the trick to dealing with critiques -- no matter how harsh -- is to remember that the critic (aka: the big meanie) is not critiquing me as a person. He/she is not even critiquing me as a writer. He is critiquing a particular arrangement of words. Words can be rearranged.

[fantasy girl]

i have a similar problem as atari but i have learnt to deal with it as no one is perfect and there is always room for improovement.

[pacmansays]

I will tell you up front, I am an extremely hard critic. I have difficulty getting past the first page of some Stephen King books. I thought movies like Wanted and the Rambo series is total crap. I even call the Matrix dry.


I wouldn't really call you a hard critic if you think those movies are rubbish :p

[Atari]

I wouldn't really call you a hard critic if you think those movies are rubbish :p


We have to agree that the Matrix has some of the most boring and over rated action sequences.

Ever.

[arron89]

...really? The first Matrix movie is an amazing synthesis of literature, philosphy and technology. Analyse it as a literary work and you'll find that it's one of the richest films of modern times. As one of my english lecturers would often exclaim, everything goes back to the matrix somehow!

But the sequels were rubbish.

[Cogito]

The "bullet time" special effects technique was created for the Matrix, and since then has become a popular way to render action sequences.

[Nedgang]

I understand Atari. No sweat. Criticism's difficult to take.

The best part is, using the criticism is a matter of choice.

If they're right, well, what can you do? Groan a bit, make some angry guttural sounds, and change the problems. You'll get over it.

If you don't like what they have to say? Hell, don't listen to it. Tune it out. It's as if you have a stupid mosquito in your ear. Just listen to music, and it all goes away.

(Of course, my analogies make little sense)

Anyway, you're not a prick, man. Power through. S'all good.

[Pliny]

Yes, I understand.
Part of the problem, though; is that I know the person is RIGHT. I'm not mad that they have done me wrong, but they have found fault with me. And they are correct.
I mean. . . do I have a bigger ego than I thought? Is it possible that I am actually a HUGELY conceited, arrogant prick, and I don't know it?

You're more likely massively insecure, and you've repressed it to the point where any nibbling on the edges sets off that insecurity. I recommend treating the situation thusly: view all incoming criticism as a devious exploitation of the criticizer, or stop putting your writing forward for critique.

[starseed]

There is a thread here similar to this, already, but it does not refer to the absolutely raw EMOTION I have when someone reviews something I write.

I'll be honest: I can't take criticism. I thought that once I admitted it, once I accepted it, that I could make it better.
But it's not a conscious, deliberate action.
When someone points out something in my writing that is wrong, I get defensive, and I am filled with dismay.

In an attempt to dull my emotion to criticism, I wrote something that I was not attached to. It was a spontaneous idea and meant nothing to me.
I send it to this girl I saw, and she corrected me.
It was all grammatical mistakes, some of them that I should have seen, myself.

And every time I saw a red mark on the screen, EVERY mistake she marked, EVERY WORD SHE SAID worked to kindle a remorseful rage within my chest.
I felt my jaw tighten, my eyes stared forward with blurred vision, seeing into nothing; my thoughts were empty, but the fury welling inside of me was real.

I could, AS I read the critique, observe my own anger increasing.

WHY!? Why do I take it so PERSONALLY? How can I detach myself from this?
She was a NICE girl, simply stating the problems, and she told me afterward that she enjoyed it; that it was descriptive and interesting and well written.

So why? Why was I so filled with dismay and regret and fury at my own foibles?

*Explodes*

I understand how you feel! I do love critiques though, as they help me so much. But yes, it's hard. It hurts sometimes, even if the person is as nice as they possibly can be. It feels like someone disciplining my child or something. I just want to jump in there and yell "DOn't hit my baby!" :eek: lol

[Etan Isar]

Let's keep in mind that a thread is more than the first three posts.:)

[ManhattanMss]

I've frequently participated in groups of writers who review award-winning short stories by published, successful authors whose names everyone knows (those folks we all imagine we’d like to be). And while those stories are usually (though not always) relatively free of the kind of "errors" we often see from beginners, they are no less likely to meet with the same range of reader reaction (from revulsion to ecstasy) every brave novice will inevitably face.

No fiction I've ever read is excepted from that controversy, no matter how literary, “error”-free, or successful. In fact, the more artful (and certainly the more successful), the more adamant the criticism usually is—especially so coming from other writers.

The takeaway from that, I think, is to understand that no worthy literary venture will ever be uniformly accepted. That just isn't the nature of art. A particular audience may certainly gravitate toward a particular writer for similar aesthetic reasons, but no writer will ever appeal to every reader who gives him a try.

Genuinely exceptional writing and great storytelling can only come from the pen of an author who has some inexorable need to give his or her own particular voice to one thing or another that arises from his very own storehouse of imagination, intellect, and talent. It seems to me that requires the very ego we're expected to park at the gates when it comes to feedback and criticism.

Improving my own writing always involves both my vulnerable ego as well as the perfectly valid opinions of my readership, best I can “read” them. I try to remember, too, that for every reader courageous enough to risk sharing a certain amount of candor (however skillful, distasteful, or clumsy the comments), there’ll be ten others who’ll keep that honest take to themselves just to avoid hurting my feelings.

So, my advice to myself (your mileage may vary) is simply to EXPECT to feel dejected and dispirited when a reader doesn’t seem to "get it." Why else would I ever hope to improve if I didn't recognize that improvement was both needed and possible?

At the same time, I think it’s important to know (or to learn) it will always be up to me to decide what partner(s) I choose to dance with, or not. Sometimes I’ll enjoy the dance and sometimes I won’t. But if my aim is to keep improving my writing, I surely won’t be dancing with everyone, and my best hope is to learn to choose partners wisely.

[Romendacil]

I can't help but feel the same way as the started of this topic did.

I am very touchy as well. But I guess I view creating art a bit differently than others also. I write for myself and for myself solely and when somebody says that what I wrote is rubbish in some sense or the other... I don't get the feeling that it was my work which was insulted (which wouldn't be so bad) but rather that it's me who is the target of this critique.
Well basically it is me anyways, but it's a way to take it more personally.

For I am not interested in conventions, only in trying to say what I want to say in the way that seems the best for it. So often, when people don't get that you feel very frustrated - to say it mildly.

But I guess I get what I deserve for trying to force my thoughts to an audience of any kind or size or at any form.

:redface:

[AwkwardlyYours]

This is a toss-up for me. I love to critique others' works. I also love to receive criticism. The only way to better myself is to get the opinions of others or the corrections other have for my work, that I wouldn't have seen on my own.

I think criticism is like a Christmas gift. If it's a good one, you want to use it as much as you can as soon as you can. If it's a bad one, you just stamp return to sender on it and try to get it far, far away from you.

The problem I have is when I am critiqued and I completely disagree with the critique. I think there are times that it's okay to say "Thanks, but no thanks."

I once had someone tell me one of my characters was too whiny. Well, yes. He was designed to be a weasel-like and annoying character. If I made him less whiny, he wouldn't be the type of character I needed him to be.

But just the same, I accept criticism with open arms.

[daydreamer]

As I see it - it isn't just a matter of reviewing or being reviewed,accepting or just giving. It should be a dialogue between the two. The reviewer makes a suggestion and the writer comes back with reasons for agreeing or disagreeing. This way both parties take something from the experience, learn from each other.

[Aenigma]

I'm the same way with being critiqued, it's a love hate relationship.
What I found about myself was I questioned the good critiques as much as I argued the bad ones. Everyone is going to have a opinion, and sometimes it takes a bad critique to make you step back and reasses a character, maybe he is too whiny, there are always other ways to be weasel-like and annoying (nagging, staring, or even if they just plain smell bad). Either way you're going to learn something, maybe you're doing something right, maybe you're doing something wrong, but like going to the Doctor's you can always get a second opinion.

[Andrius]

Hey Atari this is OverDoseD/Infinity from sfdt. Remember me?

Your reviews on my movies are great. I love them.

On topic: It's bad if you don't accept criticism but it's important you because it helps you improve dramatically.

[bluebell80]

I've been involved in many writers groups and took classes in college on creative writing and English/Lit. Through that, I have found there are two types of feed back for writing, the Editor or Teacher feedback, or Reader Feedback.

When we ask other writers, or editors, or teachers to read our work, they look at it from the perspective of the writing itself. How are the sentences formed, could this be said better, spelling, format, and grammar...that stuff.

The Reader gives feedback on how they felt about reading it. How did the book make them feel, happy, sad, anxious, angry? Did they feel what the characters were feeling? Did the go through the experience with the characters? Were they satisfied with the overall storyline and sequence of events? Was the ending good for them?

Now in giving criticism, I often find myself giving editor type suggestions. Sometimes I have to let go of my writer's eyes, and read with readers eyes.

As writers critiquing other writers work, we often look at the work on how as a writer we would make it better. We start nit-picking at every little thing, and often obliterate the author's self esteem in the process. We all mean well, but often our form leaves much to be desired.

When we want to get feedback on something, we have to ask ourselves which kind of feedback are we looking for? The kind to improve our prose, or the kind to improve our storytelling? Ask for feedback from those in the writing community and you will more than likely get advice on your prose. Look for people interested in books like your story, and ask readers not associated with writing their opinion. You will get two totally different types of critiques.

People with little writing skill will be more likely to tell you your writing is gold. People who think they have/or may really have, writing skills will point out every tiny mistake.

If you haven't developed a thick enough skin to rejection yet, don't aim to ask writers what they think of your work. You're better off finding readers to read you.

My skin thickened up after going through acting classes in college. Nothing is scarier than standing in front of a crowd performing a ten minute monologue. And then having the teacher tear your performance apart line by line in front of everyone. It's enough to make you vomit, I can tell you.

No critique has every induced vomiting in me before or since, but that first year class made me.

I've learned a few things along the way in the world of writing...when it comes to asking for a critique I have found these things soften the blow of negative criticism.

When putting a piece up for others to read, I always make sure I have proofread it at least ten times. Fixed grammatical mistakes. Make sure what I wrote reads clearly. Spellcheck! Read my piece once last time, out loud to myself, before posting it. I change anything that is difficult to read out loud, and any dialog that doesn't sound natural.

I do those things before I post any type of fictional work for critique. This tends to help writers read more like readers, instead of like editors.

[Cogito]

Thank you, Jennifer, for posting it in those terms, It puts into much clearer terms a distinction I have tried to make in the past, with only partial success: how constructive critique differs from movie, music, and book reviews provided for potential consumers.

Teacher feedback os the kind of feedback for a work in progress, or at least a work stiull subject to revision. Reader feedback is a rating of a finished, immutable product; it judges whether the writing is worth spending money or time on reading it.

Teacher feedback is NOT a rating. It may include a critics estimate of the potential of a piece, but the important part is WHERE the strongest and weakest elements are, WHY they are strong or weak, and HOW the weakest elements can be improved. Applied iteratively, it can result in any arbitrary amount of improvement, so any prohection of te value of the final product is meaningless.

Teacher review is what we aim for here. Any piece of writing can be improved. One only must find where and how to best make those improvements. Reader reviews may be good for ego stroking, but they do not result in better writing.

[wt6869]

Before you read the critiques, tell yourself that red is your friend. That the red marks you see are helping you to become a better writer, help you to refine your technique and master your trade.
You're going to have to find a way to turn those negative feelings into positive (or neutral feelings at the very least).
Best of luck. I'm not good with criticism either. Fortunately for me, I am my own worse critic.

[seta]

I just wanted to make one point about ego to the OP;

When you get upset at someone finding fault in your work it is a sign of an unhealthy ego, not a large ego. Rather, you are insecure about yourself, and thus your work becomes and extension of self. When someone attacks your work, you assume they are attacking you.

Facing your insecurity is the key to solving your trouble.

[KurtistheTurtle]

So why? Why was I so filled with dismay and regret and fury at my own foibles?

Don't explode!

I have a simple solution to your problem. It will either work or it won't. You've gotta find something else in your life that's so intense it turns the volume down on writing. And ponder on this: It's not only ok to be wrong, it's necessary.



*Explodes*

I tried.