Getting personal with critiques.

[Steerpike]

Yeah, I've had a lot of reviews on one of my chapters, and one person had a huge block of text that they didn't understand, but didn't elaborate on it. I think it's my style that threw them off. Also some people have thought my antagonist is a pedophile which is definitely not the direction I was going in with him, but only two people thought that out of of maybe fifteen people that read it. So yeah, sometimes it's the readers who don't see things clearly as others.

Yes, ultimately the final judgment rests with the writer, who is after all the artist that is trying to create something. Critiques can provide a wealth of ideas and information, but only the writer knows her artistic vision and how best to stay true to it. Tying that in to the original question...I will provide some comments that are more objective in nature, such as perhaps a broad comment or two about grammar, but I feel that the most helpful information relates to what worked for me (or did not work) and why. This is invariably "personal" to some degree, because you aren't commenting on how well someone did on a math problem, but on a very personal expression of that person in the form of creative output. There's no reason to cast the critique in overtly personal language, such as by questioning the intelligence or literacy of the writer, or speculating on their ancestry, but there's no getting around the fact that by the very process of critiquing you are commenting on an intensely personal aspect of the writer's life. At least, that's the case with most writers I know.

[The Tourist]

but there's no getting around the fact that by the very process of critiquing you are commenting on an intensely personal aspect of the writer's life. At least, that's the case with most writers I know.

Alright, fair enough. But just how does one read and critque the fourteenth zombie thread of the week that begins, "This is nothing like 'The Hunger Games'...

The problem there is not the craft, punctuation, syntax or the font used. The problem is a matter of laziness in creating a truly original piece of work. The problem, under those circumstances, is the writer.

[Steerpike]

The problem there is not the craft, punctuation, syntax or the font used. The problem is a matter of laziness in creating a truly original piece of work. The problem, under those circumstances, is the writer.

Maybe. I think you still have to look at the execution of it. There are many novels out there that follow a similar premise, and some of them are well done. Even among published works, if something gets fairly popular you'll see the publishers push out a lot of similar work over the subsequent years. Look at how much Urban Fiction is out there, and much of it quite similar. If the author is very close to something a popular as The Hunger Games I'd certainly mention it, but I think I could still critique the writing itself. Otherwise, I'd probably just skip it and move on to another piece.

[The Tourist]

Otherwise, I'd probably just skip it and move on to another piece.

And that is just what I have started to do. While this action is clearly self-preservation, I'm not really doing anything of value for the writer. It's kind of like our national facination with "self-esteem." You tell someone he's 'special' for twenty years and he believes it. Until he gets turned down at his first job interview.

Same thing here. We try to soften the blow on werewolf and fairy-dust stories by trying to couch our criticism in telling those folks what wonderful wordsmiths they have become. In our hearts we're thinking, "Oy vey, I'll bet the first zombie dies with an arrow fired from a young strong female lead who's running from an oppressive government...yada, yada."

Part of the craft is crafting.

[Steerpike]

You tell someone he's 'special' for twenty years and he believes it. Until he gets turned down at his first job interview.

Heh. This is true. It's what comes of rewarding for the sake of rewarding, rather than as a result of accomplishment. No one does any would-be writer any favors by giving them positive feedback that isn't warranted. The only critiques I've ever received that were of much use were the negative ones. I think you can tell someone something that might be harsh, on some level, without presenting it harshly if that makes sense. If the person is thin-skinned enough to take offense at negative criticism even when it is present in an even-handed way, then they're getting into the wrong profession.

[The Tourist]

I agree 100%. The reviews I get about my story in progress are often bone-head things that would have gotten my submission tossed before the end of the first chapter. If anything, it's an embarrassment that I made the mistake in the first place, not the candor of the reviewer.

And let's point out another thing, one bad review from a member here is nothing like a few hundred pans if your work is published.

You mention being thin-skinned. I think that's the real crux. When the writer is smarting from a bad critique, it's easy to say, "Well, he was picking on me."

[KRHolbrook]

If the person is thin-skinned enough to take offense at negative criticism even when it is present in an even-handed way, then they're getting into the wrong profession.

On another writing site I'd been on, I decided to critique someone's work. Did a complete critique of everything I could that I thought needed touching up and all that, even stated everything is my own personal opinion. They replied with "ty." I didn't mind, until I looked at all the other critiques, which were all praises in one way or another, and every time the author replied to them it was an actual full sentence. I even got on their blocked list since they didn't like me pointing out errors. Pfft.

[The Tourist]

I even got on their blocked list since they didn't like me pointing out errors. Pfft.

Well, wear that in honor, I'll save you a seat on The Group W Bench.

Take heart. "He who He loveth, He burnish."

I'll bet you a chocolate chip cookie I'm on more 'ignore lists' than you are! I wouldn't let that stop me from trying to provide some sincere and helpful information. You could be the catalyst that gets his book published.

[Trilby]

We all have different styles of writing and I think you have to respect the writer's; be careful not to impose your own style and preferences over the writer's.

[The Tourist]

We all have different styles of writing and I think you have to respect the writer's; be careful not to impose your own style and preferences over the writer's.

That's my point in helping to define 'originality' as part of the critique for a story submitted for viewing. If we as members read the first paragraph and our eyes glaze over, so will a potential publisher's.

Let's be honest here. You get a treatise from a member here about zombies in medieval England. The story opens with a conflicted, brooding zombie putting on his armor as pangs of anger flash through his countenance. You open the thread and read the first sentence...

"...for a zombie, he was a dark and stormy knight."

So, trying to be fair, how would you mentor this young writer?

[shadowwalker]

Well, let's face it - how many westerns have been written over the decades that did *not* involve a loner, a greedy cattle/land baron, and a comely daughter of a down-trodden dirt farmer? How many romances have the poor but determined young woman who never intends to marry meeting an arrogant but misunderstood bastard son of royalty/wealth and they end up together?

Cowboys, bastard sons, zombies, vampires - they're characters. If the author doesn't make them cardboard cutouts, who cares what they are? In the realm of critiques, no one should. If they are cardboard, or looking like mirror images of the Already Famous (or Infamous, depending on your outlook), the author needs to be made aware of that as a characterization issue - but without totally destroying the author. Writers, of all people, should be able to find the words needed to be honest without being nasty or arrogant.

[Trilby]

Writers, of all people, should be able to find the words needed to be honest without being nasty or arrogant.

Well put Shadowwalker.

[GaleSkies]

For critiquing and reviewing, I do my damned best help the media in question to a better finished product. This includes providing personal interpretations as well as technical suggestions. When receiving a critique I assume that even the technical aspects are only opinions. The one critiquing might have little or no idea what I want the finished product to look like. I find that personal statements are more helpful than technical ones. When someone's reviewing my work I crave to know what they thought of the action. Whether they find a character likeable. Whether or not suspense carried to the end of the paragraph or fell flat. Those things are subjective and vary individually. The only way I get more feedback on that type of construction is by finding more readers and reviewers. I try to provide the same type of information, hoping that the subjective information will prove useful to the author, whether it contradicts or confirms their intentions.

I also, I find it never hurts to buffer a phrase by reminding the one receiving the critique that they are getting a subjective opinion.

"To me, this paragraph is sloppy and uncoordinated."

The author and other readers are welcome to think it is an artfully arranged passage. Saying, "To me," didn't squash my pride or anything. Although sometimes I will assume that the author already knows and understands that what I'm saying is objective. Psuedo-authoritative diction might trump courtesy in how humans react to language, but it isn't necessary when providing an opinion. Seen below.

"This paragraph is sloppy and uncoordinated" (though phrased as a statement it is still an opinion)

However, if it's my job to do a critique or I have a vested interest in the final product of the piece then my methods may vary. If it takes a little antagonization to produce results then I am not ashamed to do so. But if it is not my duty or place to do so then no good will come from intentionally spilling milk. Can I say "then" one more time? Oh, I just did. I didn't mean to make so many conditional statements, but that's how I review in essence.

[live2write]

For critiquing and reviewing, I do my damned best help the media in question to a better finished product. This includes providing personal interpretations as well as technical suggestions. When receiving a critique I assume that even the technical aspects are only opinions. The one critiquing might have little or no idea what I want the finished product to look like. I find that personal statements are more helpful than technical ones. When someone's reviewing my work I crave to know what they thought of the action. Whether they find a character likeable. Whether or not suspense carried to the end of the paragraph or fell flat. Those things are subjective and vary individually. The only way I get more feedback on that type of construction is by finding more readers and reviewers. I try to provide the same type of information, hoping that the subjective information will prove useful to the author, whether it contradicts or confirms their intentions.

I also, I find it never hurts to buffer a phrase by reminding the one receiving the critique that they are getting a subjective opinion.

"To me, this paragraph is sloppy and uncoordinated."

The author and other readers are welcome to think it is an artfully arranged passage. Saying, "To me," didn't squash my pride or anything. Although sometimes I will assume that the author already knows and understands that what I'm saying is objective. Psuedo-authoritative diction might trump courtesy in how humans react to language, but it isn't necessary when providing an opinion. Seen below.

"This paragraph is sloppy and uncoordinated" (though phrased as a statement it is still an opinion)

However, if it's my job to do a critique or I have a vested interest in the final product of the piece then my methods may vary. If it takes a little antagonization to produce results then I am not ashamed to do so. But if it is not my duty or place to do so then no good will come from intentionally spilling milk. Can I say "then" one more time? Oh, I just did. I didn't mean to make so many conditional statements, but that's how I review in essence.

I do like the idea that you got rid of the "To Me" phrase. Especially when it is a simple mistake or an error that needs to be corrected.

[GaleSkies]

I do like the idea that you got rid of the "To Me" phrase. Especially when it is a simple mistake or an error that needs to be corrected.

Oh, I was advocating the usage of the "To me" phrase saying that excluding it was more likely to make one sound like a dick.

[The Tourist]

the author needs to be made aware of that as a characterization issue - but without totally destroying the author. Writers, of all people, should be able to find the words needed to be honest without being nasty or arrogant.

Shadow, I can understand your sincere attempt to protect younger authors or be positive in doing a critique on a piece of work. I get that, and I applaud your invovement. That's not exactly to what I'm referring.

There are millions of young actors, fighter pilots, even guys on motorcycles that shouldn't be anywhere near their chosen profession. They love the craft, and they flat out have no talent.

They seem to grab onto any current fad, give it a minor tweak and call it an original piece of work. In point of fact I've seen answers to threads here that show more creativity and turn of phrase than I do at some of the submissions. It's not the idea of writing stories that's on trial, it's the glut of contributors followed by sincere people such as yourself trying to be fair.

Writing is not my chosen adult profession, it's just a lark, a diversion. But when I worked I had to be my best, and I had to go up against legions of 'boomers trying to wedge themselves into a limited number of jobs. You put your best foot forward, and there was no "grief counselor" there if you faltered. It should be the same here.

There's an old joke about a talentless MA practioneer who received a hard critique from his sensei. He was told to carry an axe and then awarded a pink belt. We are not all writers. And the problem with trying to make everyone feel good is that we deny them a chance to find their real passion.

[shadowwalker]

I don't advocate making people feel good. I advocate being honest without being a jerk. And frankly, it will do no good for me to tell someone they're not a writer. One, they won't believe me; two, they may actually learn to be one.

[The Tourist]

I don't advocate making people feel good. I advocate being honest without being a jerk. And frankly, it will do no good for me to tell someone they're not a writer. One, they won't believe me; two, they may actually learn to be one.

I understand. I don't mean to make it sound that black or white. But look at the volume of "new talent" that piles up on the desks of agents. They all have dreams, and almost none of them have any talent.

There has to be some middle ground. I don't know how a vetting process for writers would even work. However, there has to be more to write about than zombies. And like you pointed out, we are the guys who should be able to use the language--and all we can think of is zombies?

We've gone overboard with 'self esteem.'

[live2write]

I don't advocate making people feel good. I advocate being honest without being a jerk. And frankly, it will do no good for me to tell someone they're not a writer. One, they won't believe me; two, they may actually learn to be one.

I am confused with your statement on making people feel good. Regardless I do believe that critiques are suppose to be mean or attacking one's work. More or less it revealing what works and what does not and what needs to be fixed. Sometimes I find people (experience of critiquing artwork and other forms of medium) take it as a personal attack regardless of what we say. It is almost as if what we present we want to force a positive reaction rather than display our work or "works in progress" as an opportunity for improvement.

[The Tourist]

Regardless I do believe that critiques are suppose to be mean or attacking one's work. More or less it revealing what works and what does not and what needs to be fixed.

I think you touched on the crux of the problem.

Let's go with the conundrum of all married men. Does your wife look good in white pants? You lie to spare her feelings, and she walks out into the public looking like a stuffed sausage.

So, do you think you're going to be on better footing if you tell her the truth. "Honey, maybe you should come to the gym with me more so all of your clothes fit..."

Yikes! I have guns at my house! I wouldn't make it to the front door!

Same with writers. Do you think you are actually doing them a favor by saying, "Well, Tyrone, your use of the language in describing mottled flesh in the seventeenth zombie story I've read this week..."

No matter how you word something negative about their baby you're attacking. You choose your poison.