Is Honesty In A Critique A Beauty? or A Beast?

[Deleted member 604]

If the critiquer attempts to soften or gloss over any problems they find, the critique will do the author no good.

I concur with what you're saying and for me I would rather be pointed towards the right direction than pushed because otherwise the Critique of my work is pointless.
I like to learn things and be shown, but not given a full on demonstration. That way I won't make the same errors in my writing and vice versa when I Critique other writers work.
It's their story to tell not mine and as they say something that is worth having doesn't come easy and why should it.

I was criticised for my use of flowery words and sentences, in a really sickly, over the top kinda way to the point it blurred and buried the imagery, the real beauty in my Writing. I'm not going to beat around the bush it left a bitter taste in my mouth for quite a while. But, now I see it and I don't use any, if I do it's used limitedly in my Writing these days. The difference and the soar of confidence in myself and my writing now has improved in so many ways in my works of Fiction and Non-Fiction.
The people know who they are in that respect who helped me and mostly it was down to the fact they guided me in the right direction and not snatched the compass out of my hands and did all the hard work for me.
Positive comments and requests all round, these days for me as a Writer both personally and professionally. And still with some negative of course but more positive than negative, that alone says it all.

 

[Dan Payne]

But now I see it and I don't use any

I'd just say, don't throw the baby out! The rules and conventions of good writing are useful but if applied rigorously they can erase any individual voice or distinctiveness in your prose. We're not all Gillian Flynn, even if we all want her fame. If people want to read Gillian Flynn, they'll buy her books. You want them to buy your books. You want them to want to read RainbowNerdAlix, which means protecting your voice.

Writing doesn't just improve by applying the mechanical craft techniques. It improves by using these as the base and then layering your distinctive tone on top, in a considered and careful way. There are readers who love language, who want to read sentences constructed as poetry. The real trick is finding a way to feed them without alienating those readers who just want the story, thanks.

 

[Deleted member 604]

There are readers who love language, who want to read sentences constructed as poetry.

My flowery/ornate words are now used in a more meaningful way in my writing, a striking effect, like fighters have in video-games, a certain move, a finisher, like how Tinkerbell has fairy-dust, okay, I may be going a little Peter Pan, Disney now.
I'll use another example - How Yoda uses his hands to move stuff in Star Wars when he's battling the Sith Lord - Palpatine (Darth Sidious) you get my meaning, where I'm coming from. Huge Star Wars fan by the way.
Bombastic use of language even lightly defines me, gives me a distinct edge in my writing before I was just using it, handing it out like sweets. A bit like how I scoff a whole pack of spearmint soft mints, no wonder it made people me feel sick LOL.

 

[Deleted member 604]

You want them to want to read RainbowNerdAlix, which means protecting your voice.

I do and at the same time it needs to stand out.

 

[RK Wallis]

Positive comments and requests all round, really now for me both personally and professionally. That alone says it all.

How important is this? How do we know what works if we aren't praised? Especially a beginner. I always try to find the good. Without knowing what works, how can a writer develop their voice?

With the stopping reading @RainbowNerdAlix, might I respectfully suggest taking a leaf from Queryshark's book? When she's reading, she says "And this is where I'd stop reading" but then she'll finish her critique.

Would that be a useful technique? That way, you're still providing useful feedback that gets your point across but also by then going on to finish, you're still helping the writer? Of course, you always need to what you're comfortable with, just an idea

 

[Deleted member 604]

How important is this? How do we know what works if we aren't praised? Especially a beginner. I always try to find the good. Without knowing what works, how can a writer develop their voice?

Very important, personally like I said I think a mixture of the good and bad is a healthy Critique and that's how I would like my work to be Critiqued. For me, I think of my writing voice as the attitude, the tone and the personal style of my writing and how I present it using literate devices such as word choices, syntax etc.

With the stopping reading @RainbowNerdAlix, might I respectfully suggest taking a leaf from Queryshark's book? When she's reading, she says "And this is where I'd stop reading" but then she'll finish her critique.

Maybe I could be a little more Lenient when it comes to Critiquing. But, I have read people's work/writing before now from start to finish. But If I struggle I give them 2 - 3 pages grace more than an Agent would. And, that is something I'm always weary and mindful of as a reader and a writer and that is how I approach it.
Going back to a thread about Book Openings I did about a fortnight ago on here. For me it's all about the opening I like to be grounded and get a sense of the story as soon as possible. By getting an idea of the five W's - Who? What? When? Where? Why?
Not all at once even, in snippets, perhaps?
And, I like it when Writers hold back a little in a purposeful way of course, keep a certain air of mystery.
But, by the 3rd page as the Writer you should have at least covered the 5 W’s in some aspect in whatever way, large or small.
And again, that is a big decider for me in my Critiques - The 5 W’s use or lack of and as a Reader the difference between buying a book or putting it back and leaving the bookstore without it. I would love to know how the rest of you, my fellow writers/readers Critique. Kindest Regards, Alix.

 

[CageSage]

A first critique session will probably always be painful.

I think it's worse when you get 'helpful' or 'nice' feedback and ... well, you know the rest of that story.
I'd rather have my work receive stark, honest feedback - the work, mind you, not the author - in order to make it as good as possible as a reading experience.
Platitudes won't pave that road to reader pleasure. that's my aim, to have reader/s who enjoyed the story, lived it, laughed and cried and believed for a moment ...

Blunt is fine, even brutal, as long as I can see the words through a different lens, from a different perspective, to adjust the contents to make it 'more' than just 'good enough' - I want the reader to experience the story so deeply they remember it ...
Not much to ask, really. But it won't happen without honest and forthright feedback from those who understand the craft.
Learning from masters, whether readers, writers, or viewers - those who love story are worth my ears if they have something to say.

 

[Carol Rose]

If you're critiquing in the Writing Groups on this site, THESE are the guidelines @AgentPete wants us to follow. But if you're doing it off this site and in private, you might choose a different method. I think whatever method you use will work as long as you remember to be respectful of the writer as a person. Going along with that, the person receiving the critique needs to be respectful of the other's time and effort.

 

[Deleted member 604]

But if you're doing it off this site and in private, you might choose a different method. I think whatever method you use will work as long as you remember to be respectful of the writer as a person. Going along with that, the person receiving the critique needs to be respectful of the other's time and effort.

My method doesn't change either way as I have Critiqued in several other places/groups and not just here in Litopia, my favoured place.

 

[Deleted member 604]

Blunt is fine, even brutal, as long as I can see the words through a different lens, from a different perspective, to adjust the contents to make it 'more' than just 'good enough' - I want the reader to experience the story so deeply they remember it ...
Not much to ask, really. But it won't happen without honest and forthright feedback from those who understand the craft.
Learning from masters, whether readers, writers, or viewers - those who love story are worth my ears if they have something to say.

I adieu to that @CageSage and you have such a good viewpoint

 

[Steve C]

I am a novice so find it difficult to criticise others writing but over the last 6 months I have studied hard and discovered for myself why my initial attempts were so bad. I now see a lot of my initial faults in other peoples writing so from that point of view I am happy to mention it to them.

I used a program called Pro Writing Aid to comb my 120,000 word novel, and it critiqued it for me. By cutting out all adverbs and most adjectives + all the tangents I travelled down I am left with a little under 100,000. It also took out lots of overused words etc. Being a programme it is impartial and it hit me very hard when I first sought its advice.

As a first step before asking people's opinions I strongly recommend asking this programme to take a look at your writing. Forcing oneself to find ways to eliminate all the highlights it generates is an exhausting but very rewarding exercise.

 

[Deleted member 604]

I used a program called Pro Writing Aid to comb my 120,000 word novel

Where can I get my hands on such a heavenly device/program?

 

[Steve C]

Where can I get my hands on such a heavenly device/program?

ProWritingAid - the best grammar checker, style editor, and editing tool in one package. you can play with it for free but if you go for the paid version it cost $60/year. Can use it as a chrome extension or it can be combined with microsoft word. It is brilliant!!

 

[Steve C]

Below is a screen shot of the toolbar it gives you when used with word. It gives an idea of what you can use it for.

Gyazo

 

[Deleted member 604]

@Steve C,
Dude, that looks so cool. I'm certainly going to try it, thanks

 

[Steve C]

You are most welcome. It can't write for you but it points out a lot of rubbish.

 

[Deleted member 604]

It can't write for you but it points out a lot of rubbish.

Damn, I don't want it then LOL

 

[Rich.]

With the stopping reading @RainbowNerdAlix, might I respectfully suggest taking a leaf from Queryshark's book? When she's reading, she says "And this is where I'd stop reading" but then she'll finish her critique.

This.

If you're critiquing in the Writing Groups on this site, THESE are the guidelines @AgentPete wants us to follow.

And this.

I think honesty is paramount, otherwise it isn't critique – it's waffle. But I agree strongly with those before who've made the point about being polite; it costs nothing and goes a long way. Some writers don't benefit from throwing their work to the lions. They prefer to write and polish alone, which is fair enough. But for those who feel feedback makes their work stronger (I'm firmly in this camp), I think honesty is fundamental. I can't imagine a healthy relationship that doesn't have trust at its core – in our case, trust that the reviewer will give honest critique and trust that the writer will take it with grace.

 

[Robert M Derry]

I'm not quite sure I have the writing pedigree to really 'critique' or 'edit' someone's work on a line by line basis and I kind of see this level of editorial as overstepping the line. Pointers are fine, but restructuring sentences is too much; it's the writer's work, not mine, who am I to go rewriting it.

Conversely, I will say precisely what I think and I may suggest how I would approach any particular issues. Surely if a writer asks me for my opinion on their work they want to know what I actually think? Why sanitize it?

It's also just my point of view. It's not 'right'. The writer is free to disagree or challenge and they shouldn't take everything I say to heart; if something I say doesn't sit right with them they can dismiss it. I would dissuade a writer from ignoring the same feedback from multiple sources though, regardless of how they feel about it. If several people say your opening is weak, you probably need to look at it, even if you think it's great.

When it comes to being critiqued I really don't mind how they do it, as long as they give me their honest opinion.

Fundamentally if you're writing with the sole aim of getting only praise and approval, you're probably going to be disappointed. Write for your own enjoyment and if you reach a few others on your way, you're probably doing something right.

 

[Amber]

This is a good article.

I don't like dishonesty.

I came across someone who was purposefully unkind last year. He was unique. Most people are nice. I always think people are much kinder than they need to be. The one experience from last year was the only time I felt like someone was purposefully malicious.

I'd like to point out, unkindness isn't necessarily a characteristic of honesty. But then, kindness isn't either.

Oh. I do have a pet peeve I struggle with. I can't stand it when people make inline changes. I really hate it. I hate it so very much. I'm not talking about the occasional comma. I mean rewrites. They're very often just plain wrong. What I'm interested in, almost the only thing I'm interested in, almost always, is why someone thinks something needs to be changed. I think it's really rude to implement the change without any indication as to why. I'm not certain but I think perhaps they think they're doing me a favor? Honestly. I don't know. A part of me think it's impossibly arrogant and lazy to move entire paragraphs. It's arrogant because it presumes you know more about the story I'm telling than I do. It's lazy because you're too freaking lazy to give me the 'why'.

I end up ignoring the critiques these two people do for me.

I've been meaning to say something about it to them but I keep putting it off. It makes me see red. I'm going to have to get a friend to bring it up for me.

 

[Amber]

..and I want to add..

When I critique the writer gets my first impression. I try not to question my first impression but give it to them right away and often unvarnished. I'm not a big fan of 'but you just don't understand the story' attitude. Pages should stand on their own. I'm also not a big fan of 'yeah but' either. I can't count how many times I've read a book series out of order. It doesn't make a difference if the writing is good enough. A lot of people might feel differently but I learned how to read by figuring out the meaning of words and understanding story in context. That's my reading style. I have a feeling there might be a flaw in the world building, especially since good world building is predicated on associations within our culture, if things can't be understood without lots of splaining.

If it's any consolation to anyone who imagines me a monster, I'm just as hard on myself. Also, I'm not as mean as I might seem. The meanest critique is likely to be the first one. After a while, what the person is willing to hear and what they aren't receptive to becomes obvious. Then there's no point in saying certain things.

 

[RK Wallis]

It's arrogant because it presumes you know more about the story I'm telling than I do. It's lazy because you're too freaking lazy to give me the 'why'.

Yes, I totally agree with you, I don't know how you tolerate it. I'd also add it's disrespectful too. you're as much a writer as they are. They need to respect that.

 

[Barbara]

When it comes to being critiqued I really don't mind how they do it, as long as they give me their honest opinion.

That is so true. We all have our own ways of critiquing which adds to the total; getting different angles is good. After all, the readers will be just as varied.

Personally, I like brute, honest feedback. No need to mince the words. I can handle it. I don't mind someone saying it's rubbish if they can back it up with a reason other than the fact they're just being an ar*e. I have one of those feedbackers in my life. (Some analytical, detached realist.) I still give my work for critiquing. The good bits are worth it. I look at the feedback then decide 'yep, good point', or 'no, now you're trying to put me down.' I like bluntness. I'm not premadonna-ish about my work at all. I know I make mistakes, misjudgements, yaddy ya. I'm fallable, and I can live with that. I'm happy to be wrong. Not taking oneself too seriously helps. It's just a draft on a journey to become complete. I want to learn.

And I don't mind if someone suggest changes, or re-writes. I'm grown up enough to ignore them, thanks, and hey, those changes may say something I haven't thought of. They may even be right.

Also, I think recieving honest, and sometimes brutal feedback helps build a thick skin, which we're going to need for when the book is out in the big wide world. Pussy-footing doesn't prep for the publishing world.

Bring it on.

Having said that, I find giving feeback scary. I'm always honest with my critiques and I worry about how it will be recieved. I critique differently for each person, and take into account who they are when it comes to the amount of bluntness or the way I say what I think. But I have at times pressed the 'send' button, gritting my teeth. Last year, I gave a friend a brutal critique. What she was doing wasn't working. At all. I sent my thoughts. I held my breath, worried I've lost the friendship. After a few days she came back saying she loved my critique, and yay, she can see where to take it next. I recieved a package in the psot at X-mas with a bottle of wine and a lovely note to say thank you for the support throughout the year. She has just sent me her next novella.

It's hard to know how people will recieve the critique.

 

[Katie-Ellen]

You what? @Amber. Someone whipping the top off their little red pen? Here? That isn't critiquing. That is line editing, and there is a place for that in the publishing process, but that place is not here. It's contrary to Litopia's critiquing which is, as you say, about giving the reader the off the cuff response, to do with as they will. Same as browsing in a bookshop. Look inside, and you'll turn the page or put it back on the shelf.

Plus, whipping the top off the little red pen is an act of pomposity, and at this stage, presumptious pedantry, begging a virtual smack on the snout.

Snout OUT.

 

[Carol Rose]

My pet peeve: (And this does not happen to me here. This happens in my local RWA chapter) people who say, “I would write it this way instead.” And what they change it to says the same thing, but not in my voice.

You don’t strive to change an author’s voice when you critique. Just because you’d use different words to convey the same idea or description doesn’t mean the words that author used are wrong.

 

[Barbara]

I wonder if saying 'try it this way' is actually the critiquer's inability to pinpoint what is wrong with a particular bit. Maybe they know something sounds off but can't pinpoint it. Hence they put it into their own words. Don't know.

I dont mind getting the 'try it this way' because it makes me look at my writing differently. I also like if someone spots wrong punctuation or grammar. But that might be because I'm not English. It doesn't seem to matter how many rules I read, it just isn't easy.

I find my critiquing has changed drastically. As my writing improves (I'm assuming it is) and as I become more aware of craft, the feedback I give has evolved.

Erm @Carol Rose. Could we have a Craft Chat on giving critique?

 

[Amber]

You what? @Amber. Someone whipping the top off their little red pen? Here? That isn't critiquing. That is line editing, and there is a place for that in the publishing process, but that place is not here. It's contrary to Litopia's critiquing which is, as you say, about giving the reader the off the cuff response, to do with as they will. Same as browsing in a bookshop. Look inside, and you'll turn the page or put it back on the shelf.

Plus, whipping the top off the little red pen is an act of pomposity, and at this stage, presumptious pedantry, begging a virtual smack on the snout.

Snout OUT.

Oh yeah. I wasn't talking about here at all. I belong to two other critique groups. When I critique here I try not to even comment. I don't mind commenting. I do mind changing my writing--inline edits. I can compare the two and try and do a mindreading trick to try to figure out why it was changed but it's not really fair. I almost always give the person my reasoning so they can make up their mind themselves. I expect other people to do the same. Damn expectations.

 

[Amber]

My pet peeve: (And this does not happen to me here. This happens in my local RWA chapter) people who say, “I would write it this way instead.” And what they change it to says the same thing, but not in my voice.

You don’t strive to change an author’s voice when you critique. Just because you’d use different words to convey the same idea or description doesn’t mean the words that author used are wrong.

I always try to use the phrase - I suggest or something like it. I'm sure I forget sometimes but the overall takeaway should be 'these are my ideas about what could be changed'.

 

[Amber]

I wonder if saying 'try it this way' is actually the critiquer's inability to pinpoint what is wrong with a particular bit. Maybe they know something sounds off but can't pinpoint it. Hence they put it into their own words. Don't know.

I dont mind getting the 'try it this way' because it makes me look at my writing differently. I also like if someone spots wrong punctuation or grammar. But that might be because I'm not English. It doesn't seem to matter how many rules I read, it just isn't easy.

I find my critiquing has changed drastically. As my writing improves (I'm assuming it is) and as I become more aware of craft, the feedback I give has evolved.

Erm @Carol Rose. Could we have a Craft Chat on giving critique?

Yeah... that's a good one too--'you might try it this way'. I sometimes THINK I know why I don't like a sentence. But after reading some manuscripts which have been critiqued, edited, and critiqued again... and finally polished... I realize that sometimes the small thing i notice is a reflection of something broader. Sometimes all what I say means is, 'something is off' (just like you said). I've seen writers make a change in a totally different part of a manuscript to fix something in another part. It's interesting to me.

 

[Amber]

Of course, it might feel like something is off, but how can you say what the writer can do to fix it without a bit more context? Maybe the story starts in the wrong place or maybe something over the next few pages winds up being something that needs to be moved forward. Or back. Seems a bit hasty from a critique standpoint.

You can usually tell something starts at the wrong spot without actually getting to the spot it's supposed to start. It takes a lot of time to read other people's writing. It takes even longer to give a critique. I've had to learn to trust my instincts and also understand that all I owe someone I am critiquing is what I think about what I've read. There's a balance between how much is my responsibility and how much is the responsibility of the writer. The truth is, you have two seconds. Most people give more than that when they critique. Readers don't feel as if they owe the writer anything. I think it's to our benefit to be realistic about what readers will tolerate.

The struggle writers have between the effortful things we do in service of the story we want to tell and what readers want to read seems similar to an old metaphysical type saying that still gets tossed around ...

Would you rather be happy or be right?