Ways of Critiquing & Responding to Critique

[Stephanie (swordlilly)]

I'm curious about how this works in different cultures / what your idea of critiquing is.

From what I've heard (I'm not a creative writing major, though I did take some electives), a typical fiction-writing workshop in B.C., Canada goes something like this: Each person brings a piece that they want the rest of the group to comment on. When it's a writer's turn to be workshopped, his/her role is to just sit quietly, listen and take notes. (And not make eye contact with anyone. XD This is so Canadian. XD) There's usually a moderator who timekeeps and ensures that the discussion is on-topic. The idea is that the writer is being invited to listen in on a reading-group discussion, during which everyone is supposed to act like the writer isn't there. When people disagree over what a character wants or why a character acts in a certain way, the writer is not supposed to provide any answers. The writer is simply being given a chance to see how his/her story affects different people.

When everyone is done discussing the piece, it's the writer's turn to ask questions (usually of a reading-comprehension nature). Like: "Does everybody understand what happens to this character in this scene?" If nobody in the group understood what the writer was trying to do, then the writer may wish to make his/her writing less subtle.

The session concludes with everybody handing in their marked-up copies of the writer's manuscript. The writer is then free to do whatever he/she wants with the feedback.

Critiques work very differently on the NTWF, obviously. (For one, it's an Internet medium rather than an IRL, in-real-time interaction.) I wonder how critiques work in other circles you've been in? Am curious.

[Breakingchains]

You know, I've never been in a flesh-and-blood writing group, but the idea of just discussing the work book-club style and pretending the author isn't in the room sounds like genius to me. I hear a lot about writers who get their work out to the public, and are caught totally off guard when it's interpreted in ways they didn't intend--ostensibly evil characters with swooning fangirls while the good guys get hatedoms, being blasted for political tracts that aren't there, etc.. Even if they had beta readers, that's not exactly the same as an impartial discussion between people not invested in the project. Getting that before the work is finalized seems really useful.

But then, people still might unconsciously sugarcoat since you're still sitting right there. Even better might be a recording of people discussing your work while you were away to get rid of that pesky face-to-face empathy response

...Yeah, you can probably tell what my philosophy on critique is.  I mean, I don't try to kill anyone's motivation or anything. Even though I tend to have really strong opinions on fiction, I usually rein myself in because that's what people want and expect, and I also try to scale my criticism up or down to the skill level of the writer. (Especially after not doing this a couple of times and then realizing that if you're still slowly trying to grasp POV, trying to understand pacing and skilled subplot use is just going to discourage you completely...) But I also know that when I put something out there for critique, I usually end up wishing people had been meaner.

See, my critique-group experience is about 99% internet-based, and while creative circles on the internet usually think of/describe good criticism as being "honest but polite", I find that the unspoken expectation is usually still to be more polite than you are honest. You mention like three or four flaws max, accentuate the positive, and make sure you don't hurt anyone's feelings. Of course "YOUR WRITING IS BAD AND YOU SHOULD FEEL BAD" doesn't help anyone, but it's almost as if, with most forums I've been on anyway, there is more pressure put on the critic to not dislike the work too much than there is on the writer to use criticism effectively, and I'm not sure that's the right approach.

Fact is, if someone just told me straight-up "I HATE this character with every fiber of my being. I want to slap him so badly that his nonexistence is a point of frustration in and of itself. He RUINED the book for me," then I can still use that constructively as long as it's followed by "...and this is why." It would feel awful and it would not be fun to process, sure, but more important to me is making sure I don't ship off a book that accidentally contains the next Edward Cullen. Even if they framed the same information as "Weeeeeeeeelll see I feel like this character could have been executed better because..." then sure, that's helpful, but if their real reaction was much stronger than that, then personally, I want to know. Assuming this person has a point, that level of honesty could be exceptionally valuable to the development of my book, because they did not mask their true, visceral reaction to that character under sugary qualifiers and gold star stickers for effort--in short, they behaved like a "real" reader.

Which leads me to the reason I try to approach criticism this way: writing is not just my hobby. I want to do this professionally and I want to get a wide audience. And while my mom or an online critique buddy may not want to say those things, readers and amazon reviewers are not going to have any such reservations. When I eventually enter the professional side of this field, if people hate my work, they will eat it and they won't care to spare my feelings on the matter. Which means that if my MC is totally unlikable and my plot makes no sense, I'm going to either figure that out early, from my beta readers, or too late, from the reviews. Others may not need or want this level of honesty (which is fine) but with my approach to writing, I do.

[Komori]

I'm not really sure there's a standard for critiquing amongst "cultures" so much as it is amongst individuals. At least, that's been my experience from college. Each professor had a slightly different method of setting up crits. Of course, this is in regards to art, rather than writing, but I imagine it isn't all too different. But I guess the general way that we handled critique day in class was that you put your piece up for everyone to see, you sat off to the side, and then whoever wanted to say something about it could say it. It could be about an element that didn't work, or something they didn't understand. And the creator could chime in with a defense or an explanation if they wanted, but usually the professor would chip in and you wound up listening to whatever his/her opinion of it was.


Of course, now that I'm working in a studio, critiques aren't exactly a two-way street. XD If the director tells you to change something, you do it. But then, it's a team project, so that's how it goes. :3

[Deleted]

The only real life critique/review groups I've been a part of were in my art classes, and they worked pretty much the same way as Komori's. Very few students ever actually said anything, though, and in my animation classes, after the showing of half-term or final projects, we usually just applauded.

I'm currently a member of an online chapter of a writers' association, though, so I have had some experience with (Internet-based) group critique outside of school. In my chapter, we upload short pieces for review (either short stories or book chapters) to a group folder, and other members can download the documents, make tentative edits or write comments as desired, and re-upload the critiqued documents for the original author to see (and anyone else who's curious).

Then, once a month, we get together in a chat room and those who have read and critiqued the documents discuss them and make comments to the author. There's not really any formality to it, the leader of the discussion just announces the piece to be discussed, the one or two people who have read it make a few comments and ask a few questions of the author, and then they move on to the next piece.

As far as helpfulness I find it hit-or-miss. It's always nice to hear feedback about my work and it's nice to know it's not unreadably bad. And I have gotten some really good tips from people at times. But there are other times when the comments they make are a little baffling, like "I can't tell who the main character is". And it's difficult to submit parts of longer works for critique because people don't seem to be interested in analyzing a chapter out of the middle of a novel, even when I include a synopsis of everything that's happened in the story so far.

It's also a little frustrating when I put a good amount of time poring over other people's submissions and writing detailed critique, and no one seems to be interested in doing the same for my work--or when they do, they seem only interested in analyzing it through the lens of how well it fits into pop fiction formulas (who's the main character, what genre is it, what age group/gender is it for). Even though I understand that the other people in the group are adults with busy lives and writing projects of their own, I joined this group with the understanding that my attention to their work would be reciprocated. Instead it just feels like they're going down a checklist of things they expect from a fiction novel, not actually looking at what the world and characters have to say about themselves.

So, I'm a little dissatisfied with them right now.

By far my most positive experiences with feedback have been the one-on-one correspondence with my beta readers. When you find good beta readers, cling to them, because they're few and far between.

I like what breakingchains said about critique. I really like knowing the initial emotional responses readers have to my work, both positive and negative. That helps me immensely, because such a large part of art, both visual and literary, for me is trying to transmit and provoke emotions in the audience. If something is falling flat or has a grossly unintended reaction, I need to know so I can fix it. It does me less good to get watered-down "I liked/didn't like it" type comments. If you're as in love with my characters as I am, I want to know. If you think they're a terribly-written waste of typing, I need to know that, too.

I appreciate frankness as long as it doesn't veer into unkindness. I think both reviewer and reviewee need to work under the acceptance of the fact that we all have different tastes and they will undoubtedly color our opinion of a work. For example, I cannot objectively critique romances. I've tried. I can't get past the first page. I'm your last choice for critiquing anything in that genre. But I can't tell a romance author "your work is melodramatic, formulaic, uninspired drivel" - even if it's true - because no one needs to hear that about their work. It's just mean.

So my policy when I critique is to emotionally detach myself from elements I dislike and analyze why they don't work for me, if it's on a literary or a purely personal level. Does the plot grate on me because it's thin, poorly-constructed, and relies on too many contrived tropes, or because I never enjoyed the plot's core themes to begin with? Do I groan every time this character appears on the page because she's one-dimensional and has unrealistic responses to her situation, or because she reminds me of someone in real life who irritates me?

If it's the former, I point it out to the writer. If it's the latter, I let it be, because my personal experiences and opinions that are solely mine should not dictate someone else's creative expression. For example, I had to give feedback on a work once that included a character who was very upsetting for me to read about because of events in my past. I couldn't fault the writer for not knowing that that kind of character can act as a trigger for people who have gone through certain things, and I'm sure for a majority of the population this character would not provoke the kind of emotional reaction they did for me. So in my feedback I chose not to mention the character at all because I couldn't provide detached critique on them.

I think another important thing in feedback is to know how to phrase things diplomatically. Saying "this did/didn't work" feels a lot more objective than "I liked/disliked this", for example. If you like something, be free in saying how much you like it so the author doesn't feel like the piece was a chore to trudge through. Don't take on a condescending tone like you're so much better than the person whose work you're reviewing, and try to approach the critique with the air of being enthusiastic about the other person's work and wanting to help them become the best writer they can be, not of reminding yourself why you're the better writer by pointing out all of the other person's writing flaws. I feel like a mature writer will be able to tell the difference in tone between feedback from someone who's trying to help them and someone who's trying to build themselves up by putting down another's writing.

For example, I really appreciated breakingchains's feedback on my NT series Worth Fighting For. Was it harsh at times? Sure. I had to make some heavy changes to certain areas, expand on a few scenes, heavily rework the entire ending sequence, and tone down one character a lot. But I could tell she knew what she was talking about and she was sincerely invested in helping me tell a good story, so I took her critique in the best faith and it helped a lot. I feel the story as it was published in the Times has much more impact and better flow than that first draft I showed her. 

And I think the hallmark of the best critique is that it not only doesn't make you feel bad about your work, but it inspires you and makes you fall in love with it all over again so you're chomping at the bit to start revising--and that includes the "this is what you need to fix" stuff as well as the compliments. Breakingchains's comment that she didn't quite understand the motivations of a certain character in WFF actually inspired me to write the sequel, as I had to do some serious thinking about the character's background and personality and realized there was so much more I could say about them and they rapidly went from an incidental character to one of my favorite characters I've ever written.

In summary, in critique the things I appreciate most are sincerity and attentiveness.

[Joker]

I'm not really in any circles (or triangles or squares for that matter) which is probably not a coincidence since I actually prefer to have people read the finished product only. And by the same token, I prefer not to give feedback on unfinished work myself.

Critique is lovely and I know that a lot of people find it extremely useful, which is why I mean no offense in the world when I say that I'm actually not wild about it personally. Let me explain what I mean. Do I like it when people tell me what they thought of my story? Of course! Am I offended if there were things they didn't like? Of course not! But I find that when people set out to ask for critique, particularly on a work in progress, a couple things tend to happen. One is that - rightly or wrongly - people feel obligated to criticize, which means that they're reading to find things wrong - in other words, reading in a somewhat different way from your average reader who just wants to enjoy. I see this a lot on various websites, forums, etc. Somebody asks for critique, and 5 different people chime in with 5 different suggested changes that I, at least, find 100% unnecessary. (And in trying to follow them all, a very obliging author often loses all the integrity of the original writing.)

Which leads me to my next reservation. Many critiques and suggestions are unnecessary, subjective, and/or downright bad. Some of the advice people give to writers (with the best of intentions on both sides!) makes me positively cringe. Since I don't (as aforementioned) ask for critique myself, I don't have a great deal of personal experience with this, but I have to admit for my part that the only advice I would accept would be advice I already agreed with. And this defeats the purpose, really, doesn't it? I could just change it myself. But of course I'm not going to take advice that I disagree with, and that I think will make my writing worse, because that would just be silly.


TL;DR I like feedback on my finished products, but avoid it on my works in progress! I guess ideally I just want a reader to read it in a natural way, and only keep reading if they like it, and throw it into the figurative shredder if they don't. Ultimately it's my responsibility to make sure readers enjoy what I write. But I am probably very bad for not liking the idea of critiquing and everybody should ignore me. ;D

[Breakingchains]

Oh yeah, there is definitely cringeworthy critique. (I had someone going off nothing but a synopsis tell me to add a bunch of sex scenes so it would sell... yeah.) And if you go in feeling too insecure and thinking that the betas know best, you can quickly end up with a confused frankennovel that looks like it was written by a committee because it essentially was. xD

I don't get this though:

Jun 24, 2014 15:43:37 GMT -5 Joker said:

I have to admit for my part that the only advice I would accept would be advice I already agreed with. And this defeats the purpose, really, doesn't it? I could just change it myself.

Doesn't that assume you managed to even spot the problem on your own, though?

Speaking for myself, I know I'll never manage to view my work with 100% objectivity, and there are always flaws I can't see. Like, small example, I had no idea how badly I was overusing dashes until people pointed it out. I was too caught up in the rhythm I thought it was giving the prose to see the weird choppiness it was actually giving the prose--I agreed once I saw it, I just needed it pointed out first. And then there's problems I know are there but can't pin down, like I'll know a character seems really off-kilter but can't put my finger on why... That's when I know I need outside analysis. Are those experiences you simply don't have, or...?

[Joker]

Jun 24, 2014 16:50:15 GMT -5 Breakingchains said:

I don't get this though:

Jun 24, 2014 15:43:37 GMT -5 Joker said:

I have to admit for my part that the only advice I would accept would be advice I already agreed with. And this defeats the purpose, really, doesn't it? I could just change it myself.

Doesn't that assume you managed to even spot the problem on your own, though?

Speaking for myself, I know I'll never manage to view my work with 100% objectivity, and there are always flaws I can't see. Like, small example, I had no idea how badly I was overusing dashes until people pointed it out. I was too caught up in the rhythm I thought it was giving the prose to see the weird choppiness it was actually giving the prose--I agreed once I saw it, I just needed it pointed out first. And then there's problems I know are there but can't pin down, like I'll know a character seems really off-kilter but can't put my finger on why... That's when I know I need outside analysis. Are those experiences you simply don't have, or...?

It does indeed assume that. Fortunately, I am far too arrogant to admit, acknowledge, or allow a problem that I had failed to spot myself. From that moment henceforth, it would cease to be a problem!

As a matter of fact, I simply find that I end up with better results if I allow myself to find/figure out the problems in my own time. Different strokes for different folks. (: I certainly don't recommend my methods to anyone else!

EDIT: That and come to think of it, I already see so many problems with my own stories that if I also took into account everybody else's suggestions, I would never have a finished product at all. ;D

[Stephanie (swordlilly)]

Jun 23, 2014 19:02:10 GMT -5 Komori said:

I'm not really sure there's a standard for critiquing amongst "cultures" so much as it is amongst individuals. At least, that's been my experience from college. Each professor had a slightly different method of setting up crits.

(This is somewhat off-topic, but I think of "culture" as being just "people," or more specifically people who interact with one another in a shared context. For instance, the NTWF has a culture. So does a classroom, school, family, neighborhood, or reading-group. You're right in noting though that individuals can have a significant impact on a culture.)


You know, reading your responses just led me to think of something:

Jun 24, 2014 11:20:25 GMT -5 @surfersquid said:

in critique the things I appreciate most are sincerity and attentiveness.

This is so true. But a classmate's sincerity and attentiveness in art class, say, is very different from a friend's or family member's. I feel like sometimes, classmates are better at critique because they are more likely to focus on the work itself rather than on me and how I feel. But then, without things like participation grades at stake, they definitely wouldn't try as hard as the friends and family members.

Ahh, a good critic is hard to find.

[Shinko]

Jun 24, 2014 16:50:15 GMT -5 Breakingchains said:

Speaking for myself, I know I'll never manage to view my work with 100% objectivity, and there are always flaws I can't see. Like, small example, I had no idea how badly I was overusing dashes until people pointed it out. I was too caught up in the rhythm I thought it was giving the prose to see the weird choppiness it was actually giving the prose--I agreed once I saw it, I just needed it pointed out first. And then there's problems I know are there but can't pin down, like I'll know a character seems really off-kilter but can't put my finger on why... That's when I know I need outside analysis.

Wholeheartedly agree with this point. I often overlook things in my own writing until someone else points it out to me. The problem is that I know what I mean, so I won't even necessarily recognize something as unclear or an omission from my biased perspective. For example, until Squid pointed it out to me, I didn't even register the fact that I was completely omitting any sort of scenery descriptors in my stories. I launch right into the action or dialogue without setting the scene beyond "they are in this location." I know what my mental picture for the location is so I don't even think about the fact that it's not described, but from someone else's perspective it reads like my characters are interacting in a very generic location, or sometimes if I'm particularly lax, in a white void. I still forget to add scenery prose a lot, but now that I know it's a problem I'm trying to make it a point to fix it.

I don't necessarily agree with all of the critique I get, and I don't take into account things I don't agree with. But I'm also kind of a blind idiot sometimes, and I overlook really silly things.

[Breakingchains]

Jun 24, 2014 17:01:16 GMT -5 Joker said:

It does indeed assume that. Fortunately, I am far too arrogant to admit, acknowledge, or allow a problem that I had failed to spot myself. From that moment henceforth, it would cease to be a problem!

As a matter of fact, I simply find that I end up with better results if I allow myself to find/figure out the problems in my own time. Different strokes for different folks. (: I certainly don't recommend my methods to anyone else!

EDIT: That and come to think of it, I already see so many problems with my own stories that if I also took into account everybody else's suggestions, I would never have a finished product at all. ;D

Haha, fair enough. x3 My methods make plenty of people want to scream, so!

[Komori]

I dunno. I'm sure it's different with writing, but I can't imagine spending my whole time without critiques every now and then. Sometimes, sure, it's just a project for funsies and you don't really want to focus on the flaws or whatnot. But I find sometimes that other people bring in a perspective that you can't possibly see, because you're too close to the thing. One of my pics once got a Daily Deviation, and I hate the piece probably more than any of my others because someone pointed out that my character was too big for his daggone bed! XD If I'd just shown it to a friend or my sister in the sketch stage, I could've corrected that before I went through all the trouble to finish it, and wouldn't have had a stranger point that out while I was riding high on a DD. XD

And then there are things you just don't see because you haven't learned a particular skill or technique or whatnot, and learning that you've done it the incorrect way is the only way to really notice that it's a thing. Artwise, I like to use tangents as an example. It's not good to draw things in a composition where edges baaarely touch other lines, or the canvas edge, or line gutters, etc. That area almost actively buzzes, or it kills depth, or just takes you out of the image. It wasn't even something that was on my art radar 'til I learned about it in class, and then I couldn't STOP seeing it!

Critiques are something where, sure, you might see it later on if you're looking back on old work, but it helps you way sooner if someone points it out to you first. Of course, this applies more often to technical things. Yanno, stuff that's objectively right or wrong, like tangents, or perspective. It's harder when it's a judgement call about something as broad as, say, a story. But if it's a critique like, "Your characters all seem to talk the same way, no matter how different their personalities," that's something that's practically quantifiable, and I can't see that as harm if someone points it out.

[Deleted]

For me, whether or not I seek feedback during the beta stages of a work has a lot to do with the intent of a piece.

Most of my art I don't expect to get critically evaluated on. If someone points out a weakness in it, that's awesome and it's a good teaching experience. Years ago someone kindly informed me that I was drawing the big toe on the wrong side of the foot... yeah, that was years ago, before I bothered to learn anatomy, but since then I've always been very careful when drawing toes. And more recently, I received a comment on my webcomic noting that the way I drew the main character's collar made it difficult to read her facial expressions sometimes. I hadn't noticed it before, but they were right, and it made comics going forward easier to read. But mostly they're just ideas I throw out there, and I mean them less for critical evaluation or deep emotional impact and more for "ooh pretty" or "haha that's funny".

With my commission work, though, I'm meticulous about getting feedback from my client, sometimes to the point where the client has to tell me to be more confident in my own creative vision. ("When you said you wanted a car steering wheel, what model of car did you want it from?" <- actual question I've asked, the answer was "do whatever you want, seriously") Of course, the level of control varies from person to person (I had one client who made me redraw a character's nose about five times), but because it's work people are paying me for, I'm a lot more attentive to feedback from them.

Which is also why I'm so technically meticulous about my writing, because I want to sell my novels and I want to make sure people are getting the absolute best product they can for their money. And of course it looks really bad and unprofessional on the Amazon page if there are a bunch of reviews pointing out glaring errors. I want the same level of feedback for my Neopets stuff, even though I know I'll never make a cent from it, because I care about its quality as a published work just as much. Once something's in the Times, that's the version the world is always going to read, so I want to make good and sure that a story is hitting all the right notes before I submit it.

[Stephanie (swordlilly)]

Jun 26, 2014 0:05:45 GMT -5 Komori said:

there are things you just don't see because you haven't learned a particular skill or technique or whatnot, and learning that you've done it the incorrect way is the only way to really notice that it's a thing. Artwise, I like to use tangents as an example. It's not good to draw things in a composition where edges baaarely touch other lines, or the canvas edge, or line gutters, etc. That area almost actively buzzes, or it kills depth, or just takes you out of the image. It wasn't even something that was on my art radar 'til I learned about it in class, and then I couldn't STOP seeing it!

It's definitely true for writing too! One of the most useful pieces of feedback I received on my early work was that my characters weren't distinct enough. That's because I hadn't put in the imaginative work to establish each character's background, motivations, personality, way of thinking and speaking, etc. I used to think that writing a character's dialogue was just taking the voice in my head and putting it to paper. But the voice in my head is actually very much influenced by my own personality, and it takes work - much more work than I realized - to craft distinct characters. I have a lot more appreciation now for how much work goes into writing. It bugs me that writers and artists are often represented as being just plain talented. There is so much more to it than talent!

[Crystal]

While in many ways I think critique is very useful and absolutely essential, I find it more useful when I'm an amateur at something, particularly if I'm soliciting it from the wide Internets.

That's because I'm easily swayed. Given time and detachment from the story, I like going back over it and editing it over and over again; drawing timelines, making notes. Even if it takes me longer to come to a realization, I always prefer to come to it myself in writing, because story opinions from others affect me enough that I always try to please all my critics, regardless of how solid the opinion is. When I'm a beginner in a field, most advice is decent advice, but as my skill level goes up, picking and choosing becomes too difficult unless I'm soliciting from a specific beta reader whose opinion I trust.

With less subjective matters like art and code, I find critique more useful. Artistic critique is often something that's often objectively "wrong" with the piece, like "You forgot his left arm," or "He looks like he has a bad case of acne." In the case of things like redlines, the difference is even more apparent.

It's even better with code, because outside of stylistic choices, the difference between "good code" and "bad code" is immediately apparent after applying a certain set of objectives. Does it work? Is it elegantly written? Is it readable to an amateur? Then it's good code.

So I often don't solicit feedback until I'm done with a piece. Even then, I find it more difficult to be confident in the quality of my storytelling as opposed to my art or programming. oh well.