Trouble dealing with criticism

what country are you in and what language is your writing done in?

i mentor aspiring writers all over the world, so may be able to put you in touch with someone in your country who can help...

 

Oh, really? I'm swedish and I only write in swedish. If you know anyone it would be great. (Sorry to hijack this thread, it wasn't my intention)

 

unfortunately, i haven't had any swedish mentees... the closest would have been a kid in the netherlands...

have you googled for swedish writing forums?

 

I have, but those aren't even close to being as frequently visited as this one ) thanks anyway! I'll try to come up with some kind of solution.

 

I'm going to somewhat contradict CraigPay, but come out with a similar conclusion.

Ultimately all quality assessments on art are subjective. This isn't to say there isn't a craft involved or that one cannot improve - but any improvements are based on subjective judgement, even if said subjective judgement is the result of an entire movement or even a general consensus. No matter how many subjective opinions on a work you collect, you are not going to find an objective truth, at least not in art.

There's no such thing as a bad book, no such thing as a good book. There are books people generally consider bad, and books people generally consider good, everything in between and extremes and both ends. There are works people like despite thinking they are badly written, and books people dislike despite thinking they are well written. But neither of those judgements are objective.

Of course, all of that is my opinion, and you are welcome to disagree.

There's an unavoidable emotional reaction to criticism. People generally want to be liked, at least by people they admire. If someone tells you that something you have made is good you are usually pleased (or embarrassed, but pleased nonetheless) and if someone tells you that something you have made is rubbish you are usually devastated.

But in my opinion you shouldn't be dividing critics between those who like you and those who dislike you. You should divide it between people who have useful observations and those who don't. Most people don't (although maybe not on a forum such as this). Most people have no idea about the nuts and bolts that go into a book, or a film or a piece of music. And even when people do know, they might not necessarily have a good piece of advice for you.

My advice is to put your work out there, because it's what you want to do and it's an enjoyable thing to do. Read the comments, but don't take them too seriously unless they have something useful for you. And in the mean time read some more and write some more.

 

I only accept praise when I feel like I've deserved it...which like most folk isn't very often. I've never been totally happy with a finished piece but there some core concepts I've created that I am quite proud of. I only realised recently that I am very over-keen to get feedback from people, to the point where I don't properly draft the work I sending out to get critiqued. I guess this is just a because of my constant need for someone else to confirm what I'm saying makes sense. In reality I need a collaborator to discuss and propel my ideas with but I have a feeling the way I change my mind every five minutes would really a person off.:redface:

 

i only get annoyed when they clearly showed a lack of tact when voicing their criticism. then i go ape

 

Mistyunion, I may be the polar opposite to you - I LIKE getting negative criticism. I am a self-critical perfectionist myself, and when someone tells me something I've written is good my immediate reaction is 'well you obviously don't know what you're talking about because it is a steaming pile of exrement. You only think it's good because you don't know any better.' Somewhere in my warped mind, I think that only the negative critiques are worth receiving, because as nice as praise is, it's essentially quite useless. It doesn't spur you to improve, if anything it has the opposite effect in that it engenders complacency.

I guess there is a difference between constructive negative critiques and just insulting ones though. I've never really had any of the latter, so I don't know how I'd react to them...

 

Just found this thread and would like to say that if you get constructive critques of your writing, nobody is being hard on you, they're just trying to help. However, some forums are better than others in that regard. I used to post at one different from this forum until just recently when I realized My God are these people hyper-critical and have now gone into "lurk" mode there.

If you ask me, the best thing to do is find a place where the people offer constructive feedback rather than stuff like "that was creepy" or "that made me uneasy" etc., etc.

 

The problem with liking negative criticism, is normally negative criticism COMES from people who are not qualified to give such criticism. By definition, negative criticism is criticism with the sole purpose of proving something wrong.

Ask yourself, when reading a book do you dwell on all the little things that confuse you or you don't like? If the Author has done their job, then you will be distracted by the great writing and little flaws throughout the book just don't matter that much.

It's ok to strive to be great, but nothing is perfect. And indeed in today's world, nothing has to be perfect
Just make it good, take criticism, and make it better. You will never have something finished where nobody can say anything bad about it.

 

I shamelessly added Rep because someone mentioned Twilight without slamming it.

Anyway, just take the criticism head on, hands up, elbows crossed, legs bent, knees apart, helmet on, sword hanging menacingly from your belt and eyes glowing with that "TAKE ME ON BRO" look.

Eventually you'll realize that you're starting to ignore criticism, and you can finally start improving.

 

Accepting criticism, from others and yourself however, is HOW you improve is it not? Without criticism, there would not be any improving.

 

Well actually, I'm not sure about this. Perhaps accepting competant criticism is a step toward improving. I am not a creative writer, though I hope to become one. One might do well to ignore my critique because I don't know what I'm talking about.

 

Without criticism, there would not be any improving.

Now I'm not saying all criticism improves, it most certainly does not. If you told me my whole story sucked, and I deleted everything that would (most likely) not be an improvement. But without criticism, there's no chance to improve. Without the ability to say "hey, this isn't good" there would be no reason.

I should of been clearer, I didn't mean you must accept all criticism to improve, but if you don't accept ANY criticism you're guaranteed not to improve. Your choice for what criticism you choose to accept,.

 

Not really. Negative criticism means the reviewer found something wanting in your work, something they disagreed with, something they thought could be improved. If this is simply a matter of personal preference then sometimes it can be ignored, but saying that anyone who has a negative comment is not qualified to make said comment is just being a precious snowflake.

Absolutely all the time. I am a very analytical person with 2 literary degrees. I can't NOT dwell on every tiny little thing.

Nope, those niggling little things that annoyed me can ruin an otherwise great novel, at least in my eyes.

Exactly, but my point is that I WANT people to say something bad about it. I don't trust praise, it's a hollow victory, a pat on the back for taking part. It feels false. when people tell me what they DIDN'T like that is what feels genuine, thought provoking and useful.