How to know what critique to take?

This came up in another thread.

I'm curious. When you get feedback (from betas, or in the workshop, or elsewhere) how do you know which advice to listen to? Especially when you get conflicting advice.

All thoughts are welcome.

 

Consensus is a good tool, which is why I look for several betas for my manuscripts. I don't understand authors who send them to one or two people for feedback.

Sometimes feedback resonates right away, and sometimes you know the moment you read it that it isn't a change you want to make. With this, I bear in mind that the critic might not be right about the *fix* but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem to be fixed. E.g. if a beta says 'Character X is so annoying. You should cut her out' but I don't want to lose Character X, I would look for ways she might be annoying and think about changing them. Although if everyone else likes her (going back to consensus) I'm unlikely to make significant changes.

I also take into account the 'tone' of their feedback. If a beta hates everything about my story then maybe it's just a mismatch rather than my manuscript being unsalvagable. Likewise if they love everything then maybe they're just easy to please, or they don't know how to critique, rather than the MS being perfect.

I think it takes practice. As a newbie, my instant reaction was that critics were right and I was wrong and I should change absolutely everything they didn't like. Obviously that didn't work for long, since feedback is pretty much always conflicting. Now I find it much easier to evaluate feedback, though I still like having people to discuss my MS with.

 

Mine, obviously. (I'm sorry, I'll stop crashing your threads.)

Actually, I do have a legitimate opinion on this. I weight critiques much more heavily from people who seem to get what I'm trying to do. Obviously, if I write something, it's not going to resonate with everyone. There are some people who are just going to not care for it, and although they might make great points that I agree with, if they say something that conflicts with a beta who overall enjoys my work, I'm going to take the latter's opinion more seriously. Because there's no point in changing my story up to please people who wouldn't be that into it anyway. I have a few betas (including you!) who are really good at saying like, "I think what you were going for here was X, but it actually comes off as Y," and if they are correct about X, I will treat that critique like gold.

 

Don't rely on other's advice. Learn to judge for yourself. You can use other people as a detector of a sort, they might point your attention towards something that may need fixing, but don't follow an advice you can't understand. If somebody points out a grammar issue and you're not sure why - go read up on that grammar thing. If somebody points out something about plot, POV, pace etc, go explore that issue, too, on your own. And then decide how to change your work, or whether to change it at all. Your work won't get better if you only rely on other's offering to fix this or that.

 

Source is very important. If someone missed something that was very clearly spelled out, for instance, you kind of have to doubt that they were paying much attention at all.

I have a tendency to disregard (or at least be highly suspicious of) comments about content itself -- which is to say, if someone's critique is about not liking the basic plot, or the core concept of a character, then imo it's not my writing but my idea that they're not into. If the critique is "I don't think the idea of a technophobic cyborg with daddy issues makes sense, and you should make him cooler," then maybe I need to sell the idea harder, but there's also a good chance my idea just isn't a good fit for this person. You have to think about audience. I'm not gonna try to adapt and sell my queer sci-fi to someone who thinks the devil put dinosaur bones in the dirt as a fun prank

Conflicting advice is tricky, because it's difficult to be sure if one person is 'right' and the other's 'wrong' or if they just have equally-valid differing opinions. This shit is pretty subjective and again, you can't sell to everyone at once. I try to get a sense of which person got what I was going for better, because sometimes you can come away with a weird impression because you just didn't get the main idea of the story. The person who got it probably has better insight on how to make that idea more clear, whereas the person who's in the dark can't help as much without it being explained to them in a follow-up.

The thing I struggle with most is taking style into account. I'm not into using "That's just my writing style!" as a defense for everything, but to an extent ...? I don't know. I'm not interested in producing cookie-cutter broad-appeal writing, but that can mean trying to spin objective mistakes as 'style'. It's difficult to defend a choice as 'style' without coming off as someone who just doesn't want to learn/do things the right way. I do defend myself by saying that I've been doing this for over fifteen years and I think I pretty much know the rules by now But in that case, I try to listen to people who understand that XYZ was a purposeful choice I made, and that I made it for a reason -- they just think I've done it too much or taken it took far and need to cool it somewhat. Again, I think this is a case where someone who absolutely can't stand the style at all is probably not your audience.

Really, I'm just taking a much longer time to say what @Dragon Turtle said a couple posts above: pay more attention to the people who got what you were going for. Asking for critique means that you know you missed the mark, and those are the people who can help you get closer to it.

 

Take everything into consideration and then make your own mind. A critique is just a guideline.

For example, I went to a hardworking traditional art school (an atelier) and got feedback from various teachers most of which despised people working from photographs because it's the "camera doing the work", "there's lens distortion", etc... The students there on the other hand (some of which had a better grasp of the basics than the teachers) said working from photographs was fine as long as you could rotate what you were drawing in your mind and draw it from imagination later on.
Listen to what people are saying, take into account where they are coming from, and, more importantly, where you are aiming to go with what you are doing.

I spent a year and a half learning digital painting online with other people that where in a similar situation as me (12-14h a day man!). There, people were even more broad minded and seemingly harsh with their critiques. You see, in the online self-taught world, people give advice and trust you to be smart enough to filter the good from the bad, the useful from the complete and utter garbage. They don't hold back on punches and you learn, just by listening, that there is always a grain of truth that you can use to push yourself to the next level.

 

I think you need to take into consideration how much experience the critique giver actually has. It's usually pretty easy to tell if they know what they're talking about. Also, I think it matters if they were actually into the work in the first place. If they weren't, then they aren't suited to give you a critique, at least for that particular work. (Although this may not be true if they can somehow push through it and just pay attention to mistakes/inconsistencies/plot holes. But they'd have to be basically a professional to do that)

 

I think the short answer is qualifications.

I find the better qualified the reviewers, the more likely I am to find alignment.

By 'qualified' I mean: how experienced is the reviewer as a reviewer/editor, how versed are they in the genre in question, and how aligned are they with the project's vision.

I move up this qualifications escalator for any project I hope to take to market:
* writing circle
* beta readers
* contract literary editor (I'm willing to pay $2500-$4k for a review of a novel)
* agent
* editor

 

I think consensus from non-writer genre fans is the most useful. Writers will find something negative to say no matter what, so for them you have to decide how good their taste is. If you don't like their writing, then you can take it with a grain of salt. If you really like their writing and/or they have good reviews on published writing, then chances are their taste is good enough to critique your paragraphs.

 

Anything is helpful as long as it isn't just: Hey your story is great/shit (whatever).

Though I find I am most objective when critiquing outside my comfy zone,
but I can offer to that zone too.

As much as I find it tedious, it is worthwhile to have a line by line critique
to help with SPAG errors.

 

The only advice I can give is speaking from personal experience.

Now, I'm only saying this here because I just did it myself and was called out for it, which I'm glad happened.

You shouldn't dismiss any advice before thoroughly thinking it over, even if you don't think it's valid. It won't help anyone and will just make you look stubborn and ignorant (like it made me look). All advice deserves to be thought of as legitimate until you decide it won't work for you.

 

I agree very much with consensus if you have several betas. Gravity went out to several betas last month and to avoid being completely overwhelmed I'm focusing on the areas where there's solid agreement, like how the first chapter sucks and there's some pacing issues. The things that are one-offs I'm thinking about if they would make the story better in my own opinion, but if not I'll probably keep those particular darlings, especially if they were a conscious choice I made.

I did have one beta - the amazing @Shenanigator - who functioned more as a fact-checker in regards to the music industry and the L.A. scene in general. Her suggestions are being 100% implemented, because they come from a place of fact rather than opinion. How else would I know that the bougainvillea in California is red or magenta instead of purple and has no scent? That Jaeden would be much more likely to buy his first dream guitar after hitting it big from Guitar Center or Norm’s Rare Guitars instead of West L.A. Music? That you really can’t drive the PCH for hours to unwind because you'll just wind up in Santa Barbara? That there are no dive bars on the Sunset Strip anymore? Seriously, if you're setting a book in modern day L.A. or the entertainment industry you need @Shenanigator on your team.

 

[Blushes] Thank you, @Laurin Kelly [blubbers something unintelligible]. I have no words. Just truly, thank you. [Exits room.]

 

This is a question I've also been worried about, I've received some criticisms that I thought were pretty good and another that I thought seemed pretty terrible, or at least made no real sense to me at that time nor still. I think what others have written about consensus.

 

It's all about the Rock Walk, my friend...

ETA: And stop smacking Jaeden, he's been through a lot. ;-)

ETA: But to answer the OP, I'm actually a fan of seeing what kinds of critiques those readers have given other books or stories. In the workshop here, for example, and other places in the Forum, you can see who gives a useful critique and what aspects they're best at. Some are best at SPAG, some are better at pacing issues, some are better at characterization...I would take the known Betas and read other advice they've given and implement that accordingly, then go from there.

 

Dude, your critique was 100% worth its weight in gold. I try very hard to strive for realism but there's only so much you can learn from the internet, rock biographies and a couple of long weekends in Orange County with friends. You're legit AF and I'm so glad to have met you at this time and place!

 

http://www.seeing-stars.com/Immortalized/RockWalk.shtml

The more you know...

 

I think the key is to leave your ego at home when you read critiques of your work. Don't jump to defend your choices. Think about what the person has said instead.

THEN you start work. Some suggestions people make, or problems they flag up, will hit you immediately as being right. Yes! That's it exactly! Why didn't I see/think of that myself? Those are easy to fix, and they will not discourage you, but make you quite excited about getting it right after all. Just take care that any changes you make in the actual story content (as opposed to word choices and sentence structure) are echoed throughout the story. It can mean you have a bit of unpicking to do—and don't rush this process or you'll be creating plotholes and continuity problems—but the result will be worth it.

Then there are the readers who didn't get what you meant, or missed something important. Go back and see what you can do to flag up either the meaning, or the event that the person missed. Maybe strengthen connections. Even another sentence, or another vivid image, can make the difference between something sticking with the reader, or it getting missed, forgotten, or misunderstood.

I put out a 'sheet' for my betas, and one of the issues I ask them to pay attention to is: "Where does your interest drop? Where do you find yourself skimming, or wanting to skim?" This is important to know. Even if the bits they skimmed are well-written (and may even be crucial to the story) the fact that your beta's attention wandered at that point is important to deal with. See what you can do to make that passage either more interesting, or more in tune with what came before.

Sometimes a drop in interest can be the result of a too-abrupt transition. This can happen when you're changing POV characters. It can also happen when you've left a bit of a cliffhanger, then switched to something more mundane happening elsewhere. These are all story points that you can tweak, if need be.

It can also mean—conversely—that you need a new chapter as a transitional marker, to mark the abrupt change. Readers are conditioned to expect that a chapter change means a natural end point has been reached, and that something new is beginning. They'll be ready for the change. Just dropping an abrupt change into the middle of an ongoing chapter can be disorienting, and leave readers skimming to get back to where they were before.

One piece of incredibly valuable feedback I received, regarding the urge to skim, came from a beta reader of mine who is NOT a fellow writer. He said he started skimming during the portions of my story where I portrayed the same event from two different POV perspectives. He said he'd read a few lines then thought ...what? I already know this stuff. And he started skimming till new events happened. Here was me, thinking I was being terribly clever, giving insight from two different perspectives, but that's not how it came across at all. So I went back and strengthened the most appropriate POV for each scene, and totally dropped the other. The story now moves forward more smoothly, and I don't think I've lost a single thing.

This was not an 'expert' opinion. This was a reaction from a potential reader with no writing experience. who really liked my story otherwise. He has been urging me to get it published ever since.

I'd be much more cautious about feedback that indicates, as @izzybot mentioned, the person doesn't like your ideas.

Example: your beta dislikes your protagonist because the character is cruel and reminds them of their father. You didn't intend for that character to come across as cruel at all, so make changes so the cruelty disappears. However, if you DID intend for the character to be cruel, then don't change him simply because your beta doesn't like him. It's a tricky line to take, but, as others have rightly pointed out, you will never please everybody. Just make sure that what you actually INTENDED is getting across. If people have a personal aversion to cruel protagonists, or think it's not politically correct to have a cruel husband as a protagonist these days ...well ...that's up to you. You can change or not, but implementing basic changes like this usually means you have to write a different story. Presumably cruelty will influence what the character does and what direction the plot takes, won't it? At least you can congratulate yourself on having written effectively, even if it doesn't make you popular!

I find it's great to get a mix of responses from other writers AND from people who are not writers at all. Expertise isn't the name of the game for me, really. After all, it's readers you want to reach, isn't it? So finding out what a reader thinks is always valuable.

Finding out what anybody thinks is always valuable.

The changes you eventually choose to make boil down to many factors. You have total control over this process, so only make the changes that make sense to you, after you've thought about them. Try not to become defensive. This can keep you blinkered about how your story is being received. Instead, keep an open mind, but don't allow your confidence to be derailed either. Your realistic goal is to write something people (but not everybody) will want to read. Making improvements to a draft doesn't mean you have failed the first time. It just means you've got some more work to do.

 

You pay for your own editor before sending work to your agent? Does your agent encourage that?


For me, now, my agent is generally the first person to see my work. If I'm totally stuck on something I may send a portion of it to a critique partner or other trusted advisor (someone I've chosen because I've seen them make insightful comments about the work of others, because I've read and enjoyed their own work, etc.).

Earlier on in my writing... I've only ever posted a few things on critique sites. I think mostly because I really, really hate editing/rewriting, so by the time I've got something good enough for me to get it critiqued it's generally already "done" in my mind, and I'm really not going to want to go back and make significant changes. A word here or there is fine, but a critique that requires major adjustments? No, I don't want to hear that!

In general, though, I agree that it makes sense to look at each critiquer as an individual. What is their experience, what is their writing like, have you seen them giving good suggestions to others? Just a drive-by critique seems unlikely to work, to me.

 

If many people tell me there's a problem with something, however conflicting their opinion is about that very same thing, then there's definitely a problem with it.
It doesn't mean that I know how to fix it, though.