I started following a creative writing course a few weeks ago. The teacher told us that every week we would need to read out our homework and we (the students) could provide feedback. She also immediately said we should only provide positive feedback as it is difficult to guide someone in the correct direction and it might hurt them without you knowing. This might actually demotivate people. That's what our teacher told us... Personally I don't mind. If I post a story or join a class, I do this to learn. A pad on the shoulder or only nice words won't make me a better writer. "Your work sucks" won't make me a better writer either. Honest feedback, no matter the tone will. I'm also confident that if someone puts his mind and heart into a piece of work, there will always be something positive to mention about it.
When I was taking Gotham writing courses online, we were instructed to try our damnedest to mention two positive things about the writing we were critiquing before we mentioned any negatives. The reason is that, as students, most of us will have tons of negatives and few positives. But people being people, if you start out saying "Your work is crap," the writer will shut down and ignore you. Say something nice first! As they say, a spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down.
Why don't you jump in politely? You seem to know what's non-crappy writing, so I suppose you could share your insights with the rest of us without getting hanged, drawn, and quartered? As you seem to have a pretty solid idea about what's good writing... And how abhorrent writing are we talking about? Is it like you going, "oh noe, an adverb, bad writer, bad! *spank*"? Or something like the OP going: "Hi I'm new and don't no how to start my novel. Any sugestions?" Followed by an example from someone else's manuscript: "Hi, Newbie, this is how I start mine 'The woman woke up at 6 o'clock in the morning when a black bird crashed through her bedroom window and smacked down on her beautiful face almost causing her to choke on the shiny, mysterious feathers!' I think it's good because I keep the character's name a mystery so the reader has to read on to find it out, good hook, right? Etc etc." I haven't followed the General Writing room all that closely recently, though I'm quite sure I've offered some advice with some examples of my own... Gulp. In the end it's the OP's responsibility to decide how to go about their problem, so I wouldn't lose my sleep over if you haven't stepped in. One thing I don't find all that useful, though, is offering some obscure advice without examples. "Okay, Mrs. Driving Instructor. I'm ready to take this puppy to the streets! So... what do I do?" "You have to be careful not to strain the car too much when you start it." "Okay, so... how do I start it? Just... turn the key in the hole thingy?" "You must be confident and alert and not rush things." "Okay but how do I drive this thing?" "You simply have to keep your eyes open and respect other drivers." "Sure, but where do I put my fe--" "Remember to treat the pedals as if they were chicklets. Too much pressure and they die, too little, and they fly away." "What the... Goddammit!" Oh the irony of this post. I just offered advice with examples, didn't I?
I know exactly where I draw the line. I can overlook the occasional typo or spelling error, but when the writer clearly has not achieved the grammatical skill level he/she needs to become a serious writer, I back off. In short, if they can't string sentences together, then I don't bother with a critique. There isn't any point. It doesn't matter how good their ideas are, they just don't have the tools to tell a written story. I've not found any way to tell them, gently of course, that they need to go back to school and start again.
The principle is constructive criticism. Lead off with something positive, something you liked, before you go into what is wrong. But don't say simply "that sucked." If you know why say so. On Zoetrope, I review on three levels: General Writing Mechanics (SPaG, Clarity), Screenplay formatting and story telling. Sometimes, they push the screenplay formatting so hard, it's difficult to follow the story. I'm reading one now in which the protagonist is a cliche villain who's chief phrase is "find them!" Then there is logic issues. One of the couples children, a 10 year old, suffers an extreme allergy attack from peanut butter and goes to the hospital. When the husband comes home after the fact, it isn't brought up until almost 2 minutes later and rather as an aside. In addition, the husband is telling his wife some very top secret goings on where he works. And in addition (this is all in one scene) the writer leaves the story to lecture the audience (actually, the husband is telling the wife, but it's a dissertation meant for the audience) on the nature of a white dwarf star. However, I lead off by saying I'm glad someone is starting to do sci-fi showing human's relationship to tech and how tech is changing them. I think the last movie I saw that did this was "Minority Report," but that was still principally an action movie.
I would never say something "sucked" even if I thought it did. It's unnecessary and also counterproductive, since it will only serve to make the recipient of the critique defensive and non-receptive, thereby defeating the purpose of the critique. Anytime I've critiqued anyone, either here or privately, I simply point out the things I see wrong and how I think they should be fixed. Of course, that doesn't guarantee a satisfied customer. One person from this forum who e-mailed me a piece to review, which I did as gently as I possibly could, not only never wrote back to me, he never posted here again, either. Some folks won't accept any critique that doesn't shower them with accolades. And that gets to something that @jannert alluded to above - when someone just doesn't have the ability. There was once someone who posted on these forums (I won't say who or when) who very clearly was unprepared to write professionally and who, I strongly suspect, suffered from some kind of cognitive impairment. Well-meaning members posted supportive statements like, "just stick with it and you'll do it" that were, quite likely, not only wrong but possibly cruel. I saw this having raised two children with cognitive impairments, and having seen many teens with mild to moderate impairments encouraged to pursue careers they couldn't possibly attain while passing up the opportunity to learn work that was more realistic and would allow them a greater degree of independence. One friend of my son's, in his late 20s, is struggling now for that very reason. No, I would never say to someone "you don't have the ability to do this" (exception: if they asked me directly, "Do you think I have the ability to write?") and certainly never on an internet forum. But neither will I give unwarranted encouragement.
I'm a tad confused -- when you refer to "their work," I assume you are referring to the workshop. Yet, you had earlier stated that you didn't mean the writing workshop, but responses given to requests for advice in other parts of the forum. I don't think of those responses as "work." As has been stated, often when trying to give an example of something, that example is just from the top of my head. I'm trying to illustrate a point. I don't really consider that my "work." If someone disagrees with the advice I've given in a thread such as that, I have no problem with someone stating that they disagree or in simply giving their advice which may conflict with mine. Sometimes I might even agree with that person. So, I think it's valuable to have some different points of view. And of course, sometimes these are two points of view which may both have some validity. Other times, one of those POVs might just be completely wrong. Again, as has been stated, each of us has to learn to wade through the various pieces of advice to determine what resonates with us, or what seems correct. I've seen some terrible writing in various forums. I once saw a piece critiqued on another forum, and the writer (whose writing skills were clearly in need of significant improvement) actually cross out a word in the critiqued piece and write "No -ly words!" as the comment. I was quite surprised. Obviously, this person must have read a book or an article about the dreaded and controversial adverbs and taken that as gospel. Needless to say, I did not find anything that person had to say remotely helpful, and in many cases, it was harmful.
Also, to echo Ed -- I wouldn't say, "this sucks," or even "this is terrible." I would point out what it was that I found problematic. I'd also try to find something positive -- even if it was something like "You've got an interesting story idea here..."
I will clarify. Poster A posts (Not in the Workshop): "How do you describe bats?" Poster B replies: "Here's how I handles bats in my story ... "When dripping jaws if slavernating to up the flaming sky can go but do not wing upon the faires as his crimson face stood beleagured into the wind." And I'm published so I know what the batarang I'm talking about." Poster A comments: "Holy burned bagels that's the best description of a bat I've ever heard. I'm going to write like that from now on." Poster Me: *sitting in front of computer, head in hands, wondering what to say, * I'd like to point out also, that regardless of the "top of my head" issue, you can tell pretty quickly whether someone has command of the language or not, even when they are just posting a comment and not necessarily posting work. The thread title and original post use the word "writing"... not "work" (If I said work later in the thread, I apologize.) Some people, even when just posting comments, prove beyond any doubt, that they couldn't write their way out of a wet paper bag.
99% of the time I critique for myself. If the person's writing is bad I will immediately point out those things that make it so with no sugar coating, because the sugar coating wouldn't be beneficial to me. If a person deserves praise, I will give that praise because it helps reinforce the appreciation I have fore the piece. Unfortunately, I'm less likely to point out what specifically earned the poster that praise, I think simply because it takes more time to point out than bad things, and therefore is not that beneficial to me. I just sort of try to suck up what they did right in my head, make mental notes. So honesty is lopsided in that regard. Honesty is not mean. Extended honesty is. If I said. Hey, _, I've got to say, you've been posting stuff here for two years and it's remarkable how little you've improved. Your writing is the same as it was then- awkward, clunky, and unclear. Worse, you have absolutely no writing voice. It feels like an uneducated five year old is stumbling to get his words out. WRITING IS NOT FOR YOU. True as that might be, that would be mean.
To address the original topic, "Telling someone their writing is really bad," here is my approach. If I read something that demonstrates (to me) that the would-be writer is hopeless, I don't tell them anything, I just refrain from entering the fray. I don't see any point in spending my time where there's no realistic help I can give. Having said that, I think there may be some value to the community at large in offering advice and critiques of bad writing. Direct critiques of my own "stuff" is naturally most helpful to me, but seeing the advice given others, even others who don't write well, is instructive. I can ask myself if I am guilty of any of the sins others are finding in the bad writer's work.
The first two quotes are where the work/writing dichotomy come into play. I understood you to mean essentially what you used as your example from your quote about not referring to the writing workshop. Then you also asked whether people really want to know whether their work is actually good. I'm just noting that your clarification does provide an example of bad writing and bad advice, but that it's not something I would consider "work" such as that in the writing workshop. Given your example, I'd venture that it is highly likely that the person who gave that bad advice is also a "bad" writer, and if they had examples in the workshop, would probably make similar mistakes. Some people don't want to hear actual criticisms of their work, even in the writing workshop. Some people are prepared, though, to hear such criticisms from the workshop, but aren't prepared to hear them stemming from advice they gave in a thread. In any event, in a thread asking for advice, you won't go wrong in simply posting differing advice. Personally, I think it's fine to say something like, "I disagree with Poster B, as I think his example is overly-descriptive and confusing. I think it's better to describe blah blah blah..."
Hell, I hope nobody is judging my writing based on my comments in the threads. Yikes! My sentences are all over the place. As for rotten advice... Yup, I've seen it - I bet I've given it. But sometimes rotten advice can be helpful. The writer scrambles off to write their purpley scene all gungho, and then, when their' improved' scene soaks in they realize - My God, what was that guy thinking? They learn that not all advice is helpful which is a good thing to learn.
I think it sorta depends - how grievous is the supposed bad advice? Basically I think it depends on how badly misled the OP would be. If it's a serious issue, it's worth pointing it out. The trick is in HOW you point it out. You waltz in and say, "Say dude, your advice SUCKS!" and yeah, no one wants that and you'd be acting like a jerk. But if you come in and just say, "I'm not sure I agree because..." I think most of us here are mature enough to handle that. Anyway, I'm one of those sorts of users that gives examples often, so I sure hope you're not referring to me in secret now (and let it be known that I am ok to being wrong, it's ok to tell me - just do it courteously and accept that perhaps the end result is we'd have to agree to disagree) For example, very recently, there was a user who asked if he could write, in first person present tense: "I am burning waffles when they discover the body." I was adamant that it's a grammar issue and wrong. @Steerpike (tagging him so he can correct anything I've said lol) was adamant that it is a style issue and not wrong at all, with the only question being one of preference. The OP in the end chose to follow the advice of changing the sentence to avoid the issue, which I thought was smart. But by the end of it, due to my reading To Kill a Mockingbird and finding a sentence which said: "Atticus said dreamily, so I didn't hear," I decided I could have been wrong after all. So this was one of those occasions where my advice was well-meant but perhaps it was wrong - and Steerpike let it be known that he disagreed with me. We did it in a very amiable way and there's really no problem. If anything, I've learnt something new and that's always a good thing. Besides, if the person is giving bad advice, they're probably following their own bad practices, so a correction or nudge might actually do them good, even if they might react badly at first. Personally I think as long as you do it respectfully and gently, giving room that perhaps you're the one in the wrong, you'll be just fine. PS. if the advice is appalling and you really wanna say something but not in public, you could always PM the OP you know. Although now you risk backstabbing people and coming off like a sneaky jerk lol. Again, it all depends how you say it.
in all honesty its whether or not the OP can handle negative criticism, i know i can, (and was politely messaged by someone over my workshop post because of it) as someone said previously, message the OP, they may be more appreciative of you doing that then being mislead!
@jannert , I'm glad I was able to make you laugh. Everyone else, I'm really getting a lot out of your comments, thank you so much for the observations, insights and suggestions.
I generally just say whether I enjoyed it or not. I guess most of us want to be published, and there are some really excellent writers who never have any commercial success, and some really awful writers who do. For example. In my opinion Dan Brown is one of the worst writers I have ever read. A limited vocabulary. Awful, clumsy prose used to paint absurd James Bond style scenarios peopled by caricatured stereotypes stumbling through improbable tedious thriller by numbers plot lines. I also can't stand JK Rowling. Harry Potter makes me angry and I find her attempts at writing 'proper' books only serve to highlight that she can't. If JK Rowling and Dan Brown had been in my writers circle lining up for my honest feedback I would have done everything in my power to stop them ever writing another word. I would have imagined that they couldnt possibly be as bad at doing anything else as they are at writing, and that they may as well have better employed their time in any other conceivable activity than torturing the written word by putting pen to paper again. If they had listened to me they would now be broke rather than ultra best selling authors who are richer than god, and make more in an hour than I will in the rest of my life. So I concluded, that I basically dont know much, other than whether I enjoy something or not.
I draw a parallel between commercial success as a writer and commercial success in the music business. Some truly talented people made it to the top and so did some truly awful ones. Cher? Madonna? Fabian (yes, before everyone's time but mine) Look at how many books Harlequin Romances sells. There is a market for crap, maybe quite a bit bigger than the market for quality. On the other hand, I can't see anybody reading Dan Brown 100 years from now other than as a curiosity. People still listen to Louis Armstrong, but Al Jolson? Not so much. Or at all.
As the old saying goes, what is good is not always popular and what is popular is not always good. There are those for whom there is only one metric - will it be a commercial success? @JayG posts from this perspective, and it's important to know that when you read his posts. That said, I would add that if it doesn't get published, if it doesn't enjoy some commercial success, then it won't matter if it's great art or not because no one will know about it. In other words, for those of us for whom mere commercial success is not enough, for those of us who crave for some additional level of achievement, the bar is set that much higher. We therefore have to be open to criticism to perfect our work.
LOVE Louis Armstrong. You make a great point @aClem . As much as I want to say and believe there's "good" writing and "bad", the fact of the matter is that all art is subjective. The fact that Kanye West, "Proud Non-Reader of Books" still has a career and yet a man like Vincent Van Gogh died broke, well... Mankind can be awfully subjective in its response to just about anything. The lesson for me from this is, I think; who am I to decide whether someone's writing is "terrible" or not? You can write the best book ever. Someone will hate it. You can write the best book ever. Someone will love it. I often illustrate this idea using Hitler vs Jesus. Hitler was a genocidal monster, a megalomaniac who started a war that caused millions of deaths, and yet you can find people today who adore him and his teachings. Jesus said, "Love your neighbor as yourself, return evil for evil to no one, sell your belongings and give to the poor, be peaceable to all men."... and people killed him for it. Good writing does not equal commercial success, nor does bad writing equal complete failure. There seems to be a broad spectrum of what you can do when your potential audience is in the billions.
I would prefer criticism, but constructive criticism given in a civil way. For example, don't just say "Your writing is shit." Give me actual advice, tell me what needs improvement. Writers don't get better by simply being told that they suck.
