For years, this question has plagued my mind. There have been some set answers, but I hope others can share their real thoughts and build a discussion about the levels of honesty needed when offering a view as a reader. I have recently written my thoughts to a story and I was open and honest. The writing isn't 'bad' as such, but naturally I work around the reactions from the reply of an author as the only indicator of if my words have been well received. On this writing journey, I have been invited and grouped to offer feedback to some very good writers. Some are very talented but not all we're engaging nor accepting of any criticisms towards their pieces. All wanted honesty yet, with hindsight, craved praise believing a story they have worked on for x-amount of time, to be near perfect and that I didn't pick up on themes and emotions because I didn't read it well enough. This always struck me as something odd as I explain being a writer and a reader. When others have said a point i made in a story not working or if they didn't comment nor speak of a scene which I highlighted to gain a specific reaction, then it is not the fault of the reader, but the weakness of my writing in not elevating a feeling to the reader. Thus, an honest overlook doesn't mean the story is a pass, but more deliberation as to why a reader did not get that 'feeling.' I am sure, anyone and everyone who is reading this, will speak of times when feedback was merely angst and criticisms (maybe even personal vendetta-type responses) to their stories. There are these people out there which is why I go to length in explaining a viewpoint. But when does being honest become damaging to a writer. When does reading a stranger's work come out as being that critical showoff who reads as though they are the high and mighty? Is honesty important? Is it better to praise in order to maintain a writer's confidence only to see and know of the issues that are clear and present? I hope others can reply, as I want to be a better reviewer, I have no intention to be critical but not all my reviews and feedbacks have been well received. Thanks for reading.
It's certainly what I hope for when I put a story of mine up for review. I want to know what is wrong with my story so I can make it better. I think constructive criticism is a wonderful thing! Of course, not all writers are as comfortable with constructive criticism, but if someone takes the time to read and offer feedback, I am going to appreciate that. That doesn't mean I will always accept everything that everyone says, but if it strikes a chord with me, I've identified a way that I can improve. And I have been reviewed by you, so I know you are always courteous, thoughtful and professional. So, I'm sorry if someone gave you a hard time.
No no... no one has given me any hard time, though I have had many harsh lessons from the past. I am always worried about being too honest. You are a superb writer, Louanne, I am sure you will know how I view your writing (I speak very highly of you to my writing friends) and with honesty, I do not feel this is a wrong approach. What I do fret over is that I was once one nervous newbie, seeking positive reinforcements knowing my writing is not up to standard. It isn't still and we both have witnessed, on the other site, at how destructive member's views can be especially ones who feel their way is the only way. There have been a few clashes where I have disagreed about a writer's insistent views towards a story that bordered on enforcing an opinion rather than offering an honest one. I recall those early days when I was so scared to post a story and checked hourly if anyone read it and/or what was said... disappointed and down when I did not get the reaction I expected and this has made me reflect constantly on this balance of being supportive and encouraging, to highlighting what I felt didn't quite work from the viewpoint of a reader. Being positive can slid over to fibbing that leads the writer down the wrong path... I don't think I have quite hit the right balance. How do you limit the 'damage' to an author? Or do you not? Is this a 'lesson' all writers must go through and overcome? Hmm...
Of course that's important. Feedback is about improvement. If the critic isn't being truthful with their feedback, then the original purpose is ultimately lost. It might even be dangerous practice. If you see things and don't them out out of pretense, the writer on the other end might see them years later and even realize you avoided it on purpose. That might get awkward really quick... There are certainly types of people who want the feedback to just be a catalogue of praise. These people don't get the point and that's their fault. It's not your responsibility to do that. If your review: isn't blatantly offensive is politely and constructively written is written in good faith Then you are fine. Give enough reviews and you are pretty much bound to give someone disappointment to degrees that vary between mild and severe. As you say, this disappointment is part of being a writer, and as equally disappointing that reality may be, you can't do anything besides let it happen. Remember: they signed up for the criticism. If they weren't ready it for it, that's not your fault either. But you're right that you can reduce some of the disappointment. I always make sure to identify the strengths of a story and talk about them first to draw out where the writer excels. Then I talk about the improvements the story needs. My aim is to leave feelings of hope in case the disappointment hits the writer hard. I want them to say, "Okay, so I screwed up bad in those parts, but it's not all bad, and I can improve the bad to make it much better." I would generally encourage everyone to do the same. A story can't be 100% bad if there is honest effort behind it.
We have to work from the assumption that that is what the writer wants. Of course, we try to frame our words in the best way we can be helpful. This probably means separating our own personal reading preferences from the piece we are reviewing. Concentrating on how to improve the piece, while keeping in mind it is the writer's creation. Lol, I think I know who you are talking about. Fortunately, there are not many like him. But the writer needs to have some ability to separate the wheat from the chaff. Being kind, of course, and mentioning positives as well as areas of improvement. But ultimately, a writer who is asking for feedback should be prepared for the fact that not all of it will helpful.
You should not. Definitely one of those "can't stand the heat" situations. The editors and agents are going to beat you with a wooden spoon, light you on fire, and then noose you from a moving helicopter (I randomly watched Scarface last night so that one is fresh on my brain). I equate the serious pursuit of writing to going to prison. Better to get your ass beat on day one so you get used to it faster. You don't need to be mean or brutal about it, but pulling punches doesn't help anyone.
Yes, you should be honest. At least that is what I expect from my readers. If you go through a circle that only praises your work, hiding their true thoughts, and then release to the public, you will face far greater damage. In Sweden we call it a "Björntjänst" or Bear Service, when someone does something well meant, but which gets negative consequences.
Interesting. Like the time a bear in my yard just wanted a meal and ripped the door from my toolshed? True story.
Birdseed that was stashed inside the tool shed. It was never a problem until it was. The tool shed abutted my bedroom, same wall as my headboard. I could hear it growling and thrashing and shit. That was one of 4 or 5 notable bear encounters for me. The best was when my 6# dog tried to attack one. He might not have been afraid but I sure was.
I believe you absolutely should be honest, but in this last week, I've run up against at least two, if not three different people who didn't appreciate it. Apparently, all they want to be told is that their writing is wonderful and the best thing since Nutella. EDIT: Just came across one more. Writers - you can defend your work when it's being commented on in a forum, but just remember, you won't get the chance to do that when it's in front of a reader.
I wasn't around long enough to know exweedfarmer but I remember evild4ve. He seemed really knowledgeable and smart but he placed no restrictions on his choice of words, and some of his posts were brutal. In fact, when he made a return after a long absence, the very first thing he did was comment on a story I had in the workshop at the time. Imo, at least in that instance, his feedback was pretty fair and well said.
I was given a critique by evil4dave, but did not see it as brutal or mean. It was in my opinion constructive and also helped me identify a core problem with the text.
That's exactly it. We're writers. One of the things we do is choose our words appropriately, even while being honest. Anyway, I probably shouldn't have mentioned any names in the first place, those people aren't around to defend themselves. My bad.
Honesty is the only policy, but that can be conveyed in different ways, depending on the piece under review and stated position of author (newbie, looking for brutal, focus on SPAG/English as 2nd language, story details, whether engaging/interesting, etc). The workshop can be a little coy and polite sometimes. That's better than bitter and twisted, but it could be a little more robust on occasion. Members tend to pass comment primarily on workshop posts they've enjoyed or are within a genre they normally read, for which I'd condemn them unabashed if I weren't inclined to do the same myself. So it's ok. Feedback on shortcomings can sting a bit, but are often appreciated better over time. We can all be impatient to have got the thing right, projecting onto the reader when limitations are pointed out, but letting it settle, considering the feedback over time, is massively useful for developing the skills needed to turn something worth writing into something worth reading. Personally, I like humour in responses but not when it comes across as glib or disrespectful. The exchange between author and reviewer can also be interesting when it doesn't devolve into silly argumentative mode, though the practice seems generally to say thanks and little more for fear of coming across argumentative. I've had over and back on collaborative board and found it especially helpful. Regarding reviews, not for the first time I'll quote Gaiman who said a reviewer may well correctly identify what's wrong and maybe even why, but will more often be incorrect on how to fix it. When I remember that, I try to apply it to feedback but often unsuccessfully and end up making suggestions all the same. I know that I've approached corrective measures differently to how they were suggested by reviewers and ended up with something better than what was there before the review. I read most things that are posted in the workshop and have given my feedback, however useful, on many of them. I tend to avoid posting on members' workshop when I perceive a negative reaction to my views. Or no reaction. I also avoid if the piece holds little that's of interest to me, something I'm better at managing than when I was new around here. Like the others above, I miss @evild4ve. He also reviewed a couple of mine and, when I translated his feedback into my level of functional English, there were gems of insight waiting to be discovered.
Well, it often depends on who you're critiquing. Given that this forum is for writers of all levels of experience and ability, it may not always be appropriate to give everyone feedback in the same way. I'd also say, if there are particular things you want feedback on, I'd give some direction in your opening post, so the critiquer knows what you're specifically looking for and can concentrate on it.
Generally id say tailor your critique to the skill level of the writer concerned...someone who's just starting out needs a different style of critique from a published author with an ARC Also be clear about your motivations, what got EWF banned in the end was that he was tearing people down to stroke his own ego rather than being motivated by a desire to help them improve. That was also true of another now ex member who was very impressed with his own skill as a writer...much more so than his actual ability deserved. If you think your own work is the benchmark by which all others should be judged then you're going to slip on the banana skin of your own vanity. Evildave was different - his critiques were at times brutal but generally came from the right place, even if he could have been more sensitive in how they were worded (on mentioning names thing, i think its okay to name now banned members as examples of what not to do - joe sixpak is an absolute classic example of not applying the 'first know what you're talking about' rule of thumb. but we wouldn't want this to extend to members who are still here as that way flaming arguments lie)
These discussions put me in mind of a story my mother liked to tell about the tenor Count John McCormack who was summoned by a proud dad to evaluate the singing of his beloved son. After the young man finished his delivery, the dad turned to the Count, expecting exuberance. The Count simply replied, "I don't care for that song," against which the father pushed further. "But what of his execution?" "Oh yes," McCormack replied, "I'm in favour of it."
Just for the shiz and giggles, I looked up his posts. Wrey was a lot more patient than I would have been.
Yep, it's always best to be honest. But as others mentioned, of course one must be tactful and be mindful of the level of writer and work that is being critiqued. I try to mostly avoid the posts from extremely green writers, as I'm not sure I can strike that proper balance, and I worry about coming across as discouraging. I know I'm guilty of sugarcoating things a little in some of my critiques. I don't want to upset anyone! It's tricky. I feel most comfortable offering critiques to experienced writers, especially those who I feel are better than me. They know they're good, so they aren't going to be upset if I don't care for this or that thing in their story, but it might prove to be useful feedback. It might seem odd, but judging contests over on the sister site is a completely different experience for me. Everyone who enters is putting themselves on the line, hoping to win, and my task is to assign scores out of 20 and explain why I scored that way. I've given out a handful of perfect 20/20s and plenty of 18 and 19s. But I have also given out a few 8s, 9s, and 10s. And maybe even a 7. I've written things like, "this reads like a first draft with no editing," and, "with respect, this is not a short story." I'm not very active over there, so maybe that's why I am okay with it? I'm not as concerned about the entrants hating me? Maybe it's that no one argues with my assessment? I'm not sure. But it's far easier to be honest in that context. For critiques on my own stories, what's been most useful is knowing what is and isn't working. How to fix it advice is hit or miss, and I usually try to sort it out myself. But it's great to be made aware - and if more than one writer notices the same issue(s), well that's the bee's knees.
Honesty is extremely important, but a person shouldn't be a robotic weirdo about it. We're supposed to understand how to use words here, and in helping someone else express themselves, we need to make sure we express ourselves properly too. It's kind of funny when you think about it. In trying to fix their words, we fail at our own. The thing both parties, critic and the critiqued, need to keep in mind is that sometimes what was intended isn't what's on the page. We can interpret what we read in a way that's different from what was intended when the words were written. Conversely, sometimes it takes so much effort to be nice, that you never get to the idea you're trying to make, and so a little bluntness gets to the point. (That almost sounds like a Twain quote because of the pun . . .) So many things can go wrong. Really, that's true whenever we speak. And always remember, these are just opinions. There is no one here handing out the solution key you must follow.
I agree with many here, especially about feedback to more experienced writers, it seems many who have replied here are more than comfortable in taking 'not-so-glowing' comments, but with new writers, I still recall those fears of pushing your story out for others to read and having many anxious moments in waiting and constantly checking to see if anyone has bothered to read your story. The balance of being supportive without being discouraging is very difficult, though I started this thread because in my experience, an author's poor reaction is not necessarily down to them being an established writer, but an expectation and ego. To tell a story; I was asked to read this novel. There writer is exceptionally good, their skills with words is comparable to hugely successful published novelists thus I was very surprised they asked me to read/help with their story. I worked on after few projects of theirs and I was told to be honest with my views which I did. Giving critiques on every chapter, I noted what I found good, wrote in-between sentences to see what worked and highlighted any SPaG issues... all of which they enjoyed and thanked. Reaching chapter 28 of 30, my last review drew no comments from them, simply a thanks and no questions to what I felt of the story thus far. What happened next upset me, as they posted a rant (a day after my critique) on a forum to speak about what they view as readers offering poor reviews to people. They argued that those who offer line-to-line edits are beginners who fail to grasp the feeling of the story whereby interactions with the author is the true meaning of being a good and useful reviewer. Offering a SPaG option, in their eyes, can belittle an author and offers no help in if a chapter/story worked. This post garnered much debate about the right and wrongs of how to offer a good critique and I was taken back by it all because, even after being instructed to be honest, that i sent 28 reviews of each chapter, on separate days, they never asked me to change my style, never asked a question. Honestly, the writing is good but good writing doesn't hold up to a weak story... yet should I have been so blunt to say... yawn this is boring? Their style and writing are exceptional and it was evident they had spent a huge amount of time crafting this story but they never asked me the question of did I lose interest or was it engaging or if the characters were believable and realistic. Should I have been completely honest? They are a writer of brittle confidence but this episode still lingers long in my mind, and one of the reasons for this thread. My belief is, that if I was honest, I would probably not be trusted with their story and there would be this awkward divide of two writers whose views do not align. It is a complex subject area for me when reviewing/critiquing/reading a story.
Some people don’t know how to take crit graciously…and some just want smoke blown up their ass about how great they are. personally unless someone is being a real dick I’ll just thank them and ignore their input if I don’t agree that said I generally find spag to be the least useful kind of crit from Betas because there’s going to be several more rounds of editing and the book goes to a spag proof reader last . There’s little point in a beta dealing with spag on something that’s going to get changed anyway
Yeah, I agree with @big soft moose that you might need to tailor your critique if it's towards a starting writer. You should still be honest but perhaps a little bit more wise with what you'll say. This reminds me of a critique I did sometime ago. The story had all kinds of problems and it was clearly written from someone who was new to this. The thing is, writers who are new aren't necessarily going to understand every thing you say in the critique. So I avoided anything that could potentially be difficult to understand and just wrote a short review that focused on one simple issue. It worked because I was thanked afterwards and I really did feel as if my critique got something helpful across. I think it must be pretty overwhelming for a new writer, who just shared their work for the first time, to receive a huge 2-page critique they can hardly interpret. Even if it's truthful, kind, and honest, it might not be the best choice depending on who you give it to. I've received a lot of critiques... both as a little experienced and as a little new. And looking back to the critiques I got as a newbie, I notice a lot of points that I just didn't pick up on as a newbie. That's why I sometimes go back and re-read critiques I got years ago.
