How honest are we with critiques?

[Jo Zebedee]

Have we ever said to someone who's really, really good: that's really good, I could see that being published, or do we nit their commas and whatnot because that's what we're supposed to do in a crit. (I have a couple of people I've handed it back to -- well, one, actually -- and pretty much said it's brilliant. But I have read a couple of others where if I'd picked it up in the library, I'd have read it easily and not known it was from a new author, and I probably haven't said that to the people concerned. Sorry.)

Similarly, has anyone actually been honest enough to say to someone I really don't think you have the skills you need?

I never have mainly because a. how do I know? I am an amateur author with my own tastes which are widely divergent from others. Most epic fantasy that I've read, the published stuff, I mean, if it was sitting in front of me for a crit, I'd red pen everywhere. (Mostly it'd be get on with the story and stop describing a horse. But others like horse description, apparently. )

and b. intrinsically, despite the madame whiplash comments last month, I'm quite a nice person, who'd hate to douse someone's dreams. I'm happy to comment on punctuation and the story, and I'm mostly honest about whether I liked it, loved it, or it wasn't for me. But I couldn't, actually, say to someone they were rubbish, in my opinion.

And yet, I'd want them to tell me. Nicely. But I'd want to know so that I can decide not to waste my spare time writing. I have other things I could waste it on. What about anyone else? How honest are you, really? ....

 

[Mouse]

I'm honest probably to the point of being offensive. I've told people when bits of their work is boring me, I've told people to stop waffling on about the sky and get on with it, I've told people when their characters are being bitches. I've also told people when I've thought their stuff was publishable.

If I see something here that's really bad, I just won't comment on it. I've been lucky with the longer stuff in that all I've done so far has been for excellent writers.

 

[allmywires]

Similarly, has anyone actually been honest enough to say to someone I really don't think you have the skills you need?

I had an...issue with this a few years ago. A friend of mine (no one from the Chrons) and I really bonded over writing; she'd read my stuff and I'd read hers. She was always really nice about mine and so was I about hers...but the problem was, she was just not very good. I didn't have the heart to get the red pen out for every sentence; I picked out some of the bigger errors but the rest of it I just made up some gushing comments because I felt bad. How terrible is that??

Also, another of my friends, one who has always said he wanted to be an author but had never really written much, showed me a creative writing assignment he'd done. I always assumed because he was an English student (and that he'd been so critical of my work) that it would be amazing but I found quite a few glaring errors, but again I couldn't really tell him I thought it wasn't up to much (it was also that kind of navel-gazing literary stuff I don't get on with).

Fortunately with my experience on here, I've never had to lie - I've genuinely enjoyed everything I've read from you guys.

edit: by that I mean the full works people have sent me, things like that. The longer stuff.

 

[Hex]

I tend to be especially savage when I think it's very nearly there -- that there's clearly talent shining through and I believe I can see ways it could be brought through a little more. I don't tend to savage things that don't work at all for me.

I've only read longer things for people whose work I really admire, so that's been easy.

I would never tell someone they were awful and ought to give up. I just couldn't. Also, skills can be learned -- I would be happy telling someone they ought to go and learn some of them (as long as I had specifics).

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I've told people when their characters are being bitches. QUOTE]

Yes, I know. I remember.

Fortunately with my experience on here, I've never had to lie - I've genuinely enjoyed everything I've read from you guys.

edit: by that I mean the full works people have sent me, things like that. The longer stuff.

I should have said that I, too, have rarely been in the position where anything I've betaed has been less than very, very good, and a fun read, which makes it easier. And since I mostly beta here...

I tend to be especially savage when I think it's very nearly there -- that there's clearly talent shining through and I believe I can see ways it could be brought through a little more. I don't tend to savage things that don't work at all for me.

QUOTE]

I think this is true. I will be savage to those who a. are able to take it (which I learn from experience), who actively want sharp teethies (I'm always up for some enabling) and c. are at the stage where they can take suggestions, make their minds up about the merits, and decide how to apply it.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Unless we're published, our opinions are simply that, and not formed from experience. So we can only offer pointers on things we feel we are aware of and have learned ourselves - but, ultimately, it is just an opinion.

I've seen work on the critiques board that is easily better than some of the recently published work I've read. However, that was just an excerpt, and being a good writer means being able to handle a whole set of different technical considerations.

It's funny - I've just started reading Hunger Games, and in the first few pages, there's a sentence here could have been snipped, a sentence there that could have been clearer, and the writing quality could have been tighter. But - that's not my decision to make - someone else has already made that.

Point is critiques are opinions, and the purpose is to provide feedback that may be helpful. If there's nothing positive, encouraging, or constructive to say, best not to. Additionally, I've stopped trying to provide feedback on excerpts written in omniscient POV because I come across so few books written in that style that I'm not I can provide useful feedback. Frankly, omniscient jars with me, so better not to say anything.

 

[Coragem]

A small comment:

We also need to be honest with ourselves as critiquers. I'm not saying that we can't, to a degree, assess "objective quality", but I think we need to be aware of our personal tastes, how they skew the way we see others' work.

Coragem.

 

[prizzley]

I think we should be honest. I'd never say, 'You haven't got the skills', but I would say, 'This doesn't work for me because . . .' If we choose to critique something and fail to point out shortcomings (as we see them), we're failing ourselves as well as the writer we're trying to help.

 

[allmywires]

A small comment:

We also need to be honest with ourselves as critiquers. I'm not saying that we can't, to a degree, assess "objective quality", but I think we need to be aware of our personal tastes, how they skew the way we see others' work.

Coragem.

It's why I won't crit any hard SF stuff in particular -- I don't read it so I can't really give useful feedback. Just in general, I won't critique a piece that I don't like stylistically either. Too much bias, and that's not helpful for the writer.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

Even if we are published, an agent or an editor our opinions are still opinions.

However, yes I am honest if I like something but I try to be more diplomatic if I don't and use suggestions on how to improve it instead.

 

[Jarshen]

If I am struggling to find a positive way of critiquing I tend not to. This can happen either because I don't have the skills to analyse what it is that doesn't work or else I don't like it.

There are enough people here who offer good critiques for me not to worry about that.

And if something was brilliant I might be cautious in my praise simply because the excerpts are shortish but I might also contact them and express an interest in more of the work. Actually only just thought that is what I would do. Mmm.

I think harsher criticism is reserved for those I know.

 

[Hex]

We also need to be honest with ourselves as critiquers. I'm not saying that we can't, to a degree, assess "objective quality", but I think we need to be aware of our personal tastes, how they skew the way we see others' work.

This. Absolutely.

Plus, I think there are various levels:

(1) the basic learnable skills (grammar -- like dialogue punctuation and apostrophes; spelling (!)) -- I'd have no issue with pointing these things out and commenting on them as something the author should learn. When I came to the Chrons I didn't know how to punctuate dialogue and I didn't know that I didn't -- so it was very helpful to find out.

Some people mess about with them deliberately, and you can normally tell when it's done for style reasons instead of because the writer doesn't know.

(2) the style things that could be stronger -- this is more subjective but some of it isn't very subjective -- and we all have our different favourites. Things like some sort of conflict, some sense that a scene is moving things forwards, that the dialogue isn't just flailing around and not achieving anything, not spending three pages describing a horse's tack (all right -- the description one is maybe more subjective than some of the others) etc.

(3) the things that are fine but don't work for me -- hard science fiction, often, really really epic fantasy, weather, journeys, horses galloping over the landscape, spaceships zooming through the depths of er space, pixies, unicorns, often dragons (sorry, Kylara) -- all of them noble and fine and occasionally I like them but in general unless whatever it is really grabs me, I won't bother.

 

[Glisterspeck]

I taught design for several years, and had to learn how to critique everybody's work. As a student, I only critiqued the work of people I saw had potential, but as a prof everyone deserved equal feedback: they'd all done the work, after all.

This resulted in two types of critique from me. For students who didn't have the foundational skills, it was all about the rules, the principles and elements of design, composition, color theory, getting the vocabulary right, basically, learning how to communicate with design. For the more advanced students, it was about the communication itself. Making sure intent was clear, particularly when breaking rules. Looking at better ways to communicate the same meaning. Revising, revising, revising to the minimum message.

In critiquing writing, I tend to do the same, except if I find no value in either the story or style, and don't see potential, I don't offer my opinion. Critiquing takes a lot out of me, and I'm trying to write my own book! ;-)

If I can tell that the person has the imagination but no craft, it's all rules for me. A lot of stuff about proper sentence structure, comma splices, run-ons, adverbs and adjectives and the like. Just like in visual design, I believe you have to know the rules and have the vocabulary to explain how you're breaking them and why before you break them. (And the explanation should never be because so and so does it, you have to be able to point out why it strengthens your own story.)

For people with craft and creativity, my critiques tend to be more about the content and storytelling than the structure. Much more subjective in nature. Lots of talk about voice. Suggestions to strengthen the effect on the reader.

In terms of how I phrase the stuff, that's tricky business. For an undergrad I had to careful not to crush ambition. For grad students, it was brutal and more akin to my own profs. (One of ours used to have us hang our hand drawn layouts on the board. Anything he didn't feel worthy of critique you could pick up off the floor and uncrumple after class. You know, just in case you wanted to make it better.)

At work, I tend to manage the UX and design guys depending on their personalities, which is prolly the best approach. Here, I've not yet gotten a handle on everyone's personality, so I use that middling sort of language, that while still being completely honest, I find a complete chore to write.

I look forward to knowing some of you well enough to be able to leave a critique along the lines of "WTF? Really? You want to show this to other people? C'mon. If you want people to look at this, look at it yourself first. This is crap." Mostly, because if you receive such a critique from me, it means I consider you a damn fine writer, and more importantly, a real friend. ;-)

 

[monsterchic]

As I am a people pleaser, I try not to make any waves with my critiques if I know the person. On here, the few critiques I've given have been my honest opinion, because I don't really know you all.

In my creative writing class last semester, I didn't even bother reading most of the pieces posted for crits becasue they were pretty bad. I just ended up saying something along the lines of "good job, I liked it a lot, etc." Ocassionally if I read the piece, I'd point out grammar mistakes, but not real often. The only person I'd actually crit was another friend of mine who is actually a really good writer.

Incedintally, that class is why I enjoy being critiqued here so much Because everyone else's comments for my pieces in the class were just what I gave them--bullcrap.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I've told a few people that I thought their work was to a professional standard and that they didn't really need my help.

I've also told people that they didn't have the basic skills down yet, and they needed to acquire them before asking anyone to evaluate their manuscript as a whole. (I wouldn't tell them their writing is hopeless because how would I really know? I've kept some of my early writing to remind myself that when most of us start out the results can be pretty dire.)

But I felt I had to be honest, because they were consulting me in my professional capacity. I think I've turned down four or five projects that way, although one of the good ones said he wanted me to edit his manuscript anyway.

Once I decide to take on a project, I can by merciless -- even if I personally enjoy the book. I figure they are paying me to point out every potential problem I see, so that's what I do. Otherwise, I'm cheating them. A few have not seen it that way, and obviously had their feelings hurt. Others were glad I was so thorough. I don't expect clients to take my advice for gospel -- if my opinions are based on experience, they're still opinions -- but I hope to start them thinking about things they hadn't thought about before.

On the rare occasions that I critique something here, I am much more ... restrained. If they are new, I don't know how much criticism they can take, and I don't want to put them off asking anyone for advice another time. I don't lie, but I restrict myself to pointing out only a few things that I think need changing.

 

[Toby Frost]

Unless we're published, our opinions are simply that, and not formed from experience.

I still don't feel like I've got much in the way of an advantage, not by a long way. I think there are people much better at critiquing here than me.

I don't often post in critiques: usually where I disagree with a previous comment and feel the need to try to even things up. I won't comment on most things, often because someone else has made a better job of it.

I can think of almost nothing I've seen on this board that made me think "Throw it away", although there have been plenty of things that need a lot of work, to the point perhaps of ending up fundamentally different. There are also quite a few bits of work that I can't imagine being commercially successful, but again I am no expert here and I'd be wary of saying it. I can think of one thing in the last few years that made me think "This is rubbish and you should give up", although this was partly down to the obnoxiousness of the (long departed) poster, whose sole response was "I meant it to be that way. Now tell me I'm clever."

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Glisterspeck, i am similar. Part of my job is to get people ready for criterion based assessment, and sometimes i have to blunt. I try not to carry it over to crits but, suspect, with limited success.

 

[Phyrebrat]

Hi,

I just remind myself that communication from behind a screen can be misconstrued in the absence of face-to-face signals and cues, so I strive to be clear and diplomatic regardless of what I am saying.

We all agree it takes a certain measure of guts to put something up for critique and it would be disingenuous for me to use the 'well, you asked for it' argument, if I was brutal (and that is not in my nature, so it would be unlikely to happen). I have seen some things said that, whilst not necessarily harsh in terms of criticising someone's work, have been somewhat unkind and at times wondered if the poster has taken some kind of pleasure in their bluntness. But then, again, it could be just the medium we are using to communicate with. Taking offence is a choice people make, so I guess it's different folks, different strokes.

I also agree with some previous posters who have said that if it is a genre they don't particularly like, they do not comment for fear of bias or prejudice. I don't think I can help in those instances.

Largely though, I enjoy reading everyone's work as it is a great way to hone your own work - seeing other members' corrections - and hey, it's free! Many times I've read something Chrispenycate, TJ, Mouse, et al have said on someone else's work and gone into mine and changed it...Up until 2 years ago I'd never even heard of a comma splice!

This place makes me feel safe to receive criticism and is well-mannered and well-moderated, so I hope I reflect that, even when bearing bad news...

pH

 

[Gary Compton]

@Springs - Maddamme whiplash? I never knew. Are you available for appointments to whip me into shape?

On critiques - you are asking for criticism so - YES they are more detailed. If the pieces were part of a story then maybe, you would be more lenient as you tried to get into the story.

95% of readers are not writers so we maybe, are too fussy. But that's good, as it's a learning curve.

Anyway, what do I know?

 

[Boneman]

Largely though, I enjoy reading everyone's work as it is a great way to hone your own work - seeing other members' corrections - and hey, it's free! Many times I've read something Chrispenycate, TJ, Mouse, et al have said on someone else's work and gone into mine and changed it...Up until 2 years ago I'd never even heard of a comma splice!

This place makes me feel safe to receive criticism and is well-mannered and well-moderated, so I hope I reflect that, even when bearing bad news...

pH

This. I've learned as much from reading other people's critiques as I have from my own (giving and receiving, that is).

When critiquing any new piece, I always preface and sometime post-face my critiques with the fact that it is my opinion and nothing more than that, and urge them to remember that fact. What do I know? I frequently ask, and I do like to help others, in the same way so many others have helped me. Like Teresa, if I look at my own first draft of 2006, I'm embarrassed at how bad it was - nobody was ever rude in their critiques, or put me down crushingly, or told me to give up writing. Consequently, I act in the same way. To be brutally honest is very difficult, because I would hate to hurt someone's feelings, yet if I go too far the other way, I'm not helping because I may be giving false hopes. There's a middle line we all need to find.

Let's be honest with ourselves: we thought our first draft of our first book was pretty good, didn't we? It was a wonderful story with wonderful characters and a wonderful ending.... but within all that wonder, there were mistakes, pov head-hopping, comma splices, infodumps, grammatical errors, and so on. When those mistakes are pointed out to us, we go "Oh, didn't know/see that" and set to, to improve it. Encouraging critiques are the best help there is, and discouraging critiques are the worst enemy to a writer. Yes it's up to us how we take it, but there are shades of honesty. My mother used to say "if you have nothing good to say, say nothing" and she wasn't talking about writing, but there's an element of truth in there with regards critiques. In the past I've cringed at reading some posters critiques of offered writing, because it's blunt to the point of rudeness, and unnecessary unfair criticism which shows poor understanding of the writing, often quoting what the industry demands, without backing it up with examples. And it should be totally disregarded by the writer, because (coming full circle) it's the opinion of another person, who is just like them, a writer striving to improve.

Let's be honest, but we must say why it isn't working, why we don't like it, why we feel it's wrong or we shouldn't bother to critique at all.