contructive criticism wanted - critique me

[Shade]

I do tend to fall into the 'if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all' group. I mean let's face it, a lot of the really bad stuff that gets posted up is beyond salvation, so what's the point in combing over it for minuscule improvements which would just mildly reduce the stench? Not everyone has a book in them - or not a half-decent one anyway.

 

[Motokid]

Part of me thinks the plain and simple "I don't like it" or "It's not my style so I would not be inclined to read more" type comments are just as valuable as getting into very detailed critiques about grammer and plot development and other such things. Having been through the process of submitting work to publishers over many years time I can tell you that if an author can't get used to some rejection in the form of a basic letter stating "Thanks, but no thanks" then maybe that person is not meant to be a writer.

It is important to know that some people will not like your work. Depending on the path to publication you chose to pursue, there may be many rejections that simply state "it's not what we are looking for" with no other explanation.

I think both detailed critiques, and some very simple and honest comments are both very valuable. As long as they are honest.

 

[Toadal]

Some of the stuff that gets posted up there is truly awful. Should those producing this stuff be put out of their misery or given more false hope?

 

[jenn]

Some of the stuff that gets posted up there is truly awful. Should those producing this stuff be put out of their misery or given more false hope?

well...what if given some good constructive advice, they turn around and do something brilliant. i would be willing to bet that many authors started out sounding like a harlequin before they wrote their first booker prize winner.

 

[Motokid]

I think if you believe something stinks, you have the right to say it stinks. Especially if you are asked for your opinion. The more details you care to provide the better it might make everybody feel about your opinion, but honesty is the best policy isn't it? Call it as you see it.

 

[cajunmama]

I think if you believe something stinks, you have the right to say it stinks. Especially if you are asked for your opinion. The more details you care to provide the better it might make everybody feel about your opinion, but honesty is the best policy isn't it? Call it as you see it.

Be honest, yes, but many times how you say something has more weight than what you say. I have been on the recieving end of some pretty ugly remarks, and I can tell you that the same things said in a different manner would have had a totally different effect.

 

[Kookamoor]

Be honest, yes, but many times how you say something has more weight than what you say.

Bingo. I think the way you say something is very important. I also think mixing constructive critisism and praise is beneficial. People are posting their work to receive advice, not to be shot down. If you think what they've written is a pile of crap, it isn't going to do much to improve them if you tell them that it stinks. It would be better that you give them some advice. I don't think the Simon Cowell approach is very practical outside of reality TV.

 

[Motokid]

But a lot of the time Simon's critiques are dead on, and usually something that really needs to be said, and probably should have been said a lot sooner in some of those peoples lives.

I'm not suggesting an all out assault on people is neccessary, but I am saying that honesty and openess are very important, and if you honestly feel something is junk you should have the right to express that when you are asked for your opinion.

Do Simon type comments stiffle dreams and aspirations, or give people the needed kick in the butt to get quite a bit more serious in persuing that dream? My bet is most of those people stomp off and mentally decide to prove Simon wrong by working even harder. The ones that wimper away and decide to quit, are probably the ones that would never make it any way.

"What doesn't kill you can only make you stronger"

I think I read that somewhere.

 

[cajunmama]

But a lot of the time Simon's critiques are dead on, and usually something that really needs to be said, and probably should have been said a lot sooner in some of those peoples lives.

I agree, but he doesn't need to be such an ass when he tells them.

 

[clueless]

I have a friend whose dream was to get a certain degree. He kept failing, changing university and starting again. I thought he was wasting his time, but I never said anything to him. Other friends gave him lots of encouragement and praise. When I told my other friends he did not have a chance, they thought I was cruel. At the end, he tried three times at three different universities while doing a job that he hated to pay for his expenses. He did not try to find a better job, something he would like better, because it was only temporary, wasn’t it? He would finish his degree and then get a job he would really like.

I wish I had told him what I thought. He spent seven years trying to study something he could not understand, did not get a degree, his wife left him and he finished leaving the country. We never heard of him again.

So I think the Simon Cowell approach is the best. If someone is tone deaf, why give him advice on how to make small improvements? He will always be tone deaf.

If you can see talent in someone, give them advice and encouragement. Otherwise, it is better to forget all about it.

 

[Kookamoor]

I don't know whether getting a degree is necessarily about talent. It depends on what the degree was in. In the university system there is a lot of hard work involved which not everyone has the wherewithall to do. I don't know your friend, but I would suggest there were other things lacking and other issues besides the fact that he did not have the 'talent'. I think a university education is more about the ability to motivate yourself than talent.

Where artistic forays are concerned there is a certain amount of talent necessary for professional success. But when someone is posting writing they are not necessarily striving to earn a living as a writer. I don't see why they need to be shot down for trying something out. There is still a learning curve to being a writer and it does not rely solely on natural talent. If someone pops on and states that they plan on trying to get a work published, they perhaps need a polite reality check if their work is sub-par, but if they decide to simply post a piece of writing without an explanation of what it is for I think you need to be a little more sensitive.

 

[Renee]

As long as someone gets praise from someone else it won't matter if you say what they do is crap. Your opinion will be dismissed. Should they find later that there is truth to what you said they will have nothing but your cruel words and a long string of lies to think on. But were you to offer some advice on what they are doing wrong and how to improve it, they may recall in the future, should they realize the truth of their limited ability, and actually have some starting point on how to improve.

You don't tell a young child that their drawing or writing is crap thinking it will drive them to improve - you encourage them by telling them what they have done right and how they can improve what they are not doing as well. Perhaps they will not grow to be an artist or a published writer but they will grow to treat people with respect and dignity. Why should we then turn and change the rules when they get older?

I don't want people talking down to me and making me feel stupid and worthless. I want to be treated with respect and dignity. If there is something I can do to improve myself then I wish to hear that advice in a respectful and considerate manner. I will not treat others different than I wish to be treated. If what you desire is for people to talk down to you, laugh at you, mock you, and dismiss you, then I guess it makes sense to simply tell others that what they do is crap.



fyi - this is directed to no one in particular, I just got to thinking and decided to dump my thinking on the masses.

 

[K-Dawn]

To borrow from American Idol, do you think it's best to give them the Simon Cowell critique, or the Paula Abdul critique? Do they really want to hear the honest truth about your thoughts, or are they merely looking for praise and the obligitory "I like it" type comments?

Simon's are best. He tells it how it is. If you can't take it, that's your problem.

When there's a very specific request for comments, are you being cruel, or mean, or ignorant if you actually tell the person what you like, and don't like?

No way! You'd just be helping them! I don't care if you tell me a piece of my writing is a piece of crap as long as you give me the reasons why you think that.

How I see it is if you ask for criticism, don't get offended when people give it to you. If you can't take it, don't ask for it.

 

[K-Dawn]

Do your comments and the style of your comments change depending on whether the person is 14 years old, or 41 years old?

The only way it should differ here is a younger, inexperienced person shouldn't be expected to know quite as much as a more experienced writer.

How would it effect your comments if the person is just writting creatively, and for the fun of it, verses seriously thinking about becoming a professional writter?

If they're just writing for the fun of it, I won't point out so much of the technical stuff. I'd still point some of it out, just not as much as if they were writing for publication.

Does having more intimate knowledge of the author help with your critique?

If you know the person and know how they learn best you can use that way. For example, my dad is a soccer coach, and he found that some kids learn more when they're yelled at, while others learn best if they're taken aside and talked to one on one.

Does knowing exactly what they want from the critique make things easier for you when providing feedback?

Like Mari said,

if they present a list of question or goals, I will address them. I might then say, "I would like to add, however..."

I just don't see a point in critiquing a 14-year-old's work. They have too much to learn.

I don't particularly agree with that. If they have a lot to learn, why not teach it to them if they ask?

 

[clueless]

I don't know whether getting a degree is necessarily about talent. It depends on what the degree was in. In the university system there is a lot of hard work involved which not everyone has the wherewithall to do. I don't know your friend, but I would suggest there were other things lacking and other issues besides the fact that he did not have the 'talent'. I think a university education is more about the ability to motivate yourself than talent.

He was very motivated and determined, but he could not understand anything.

Where artistic forays are concerned there is a certain amount of talent necessary for professional success. But when someone is posting writing they are not necessarily striving to earn a living as a writer..

But many of them are and say so in their postings.
I new two aspiring writers, both of them working as teachers.
One had his first novel published, had quite a few good reviews in the press and kept on teaching while working on his second novel, just in case his novel was one of those one-hit wonders.
The other one announced he was leaving the school and when asked why, he said he wanted to write. I asked him about his writing and he said he had only published a couple of stories in a website. I checked them. They were horrible. Badly written, inconsistent, full of repetitions. The website that published them had nothing to do with writing. They accepted the stories only because they had to do with their subject matter.

Now, please don't you think it would have been better if someone had opened his eyes and told him not to give up the day job? Especially if you consider this man had a family, while the other one was single?

 

[Kookamoor]

He was very motivated and determined, but he could not understand anything.

That seems very odd... There are all sorts of support networks set up at a university to help people understand their work. I have a lot of experience in the university system, and I've never met a person who, with all the motivation and determination to get through a course, was simply not capable of doing so. I've met students who *think* they are motivated but spend more time arguing with the lecturer about the subject matter and trying to do 'their own thing' (which may or may not be correct) rather than sticking to the syllabus. People learn in different ways - I have a great deal of difficulty with lectures, but luckily after my first year I only ever had small classes, which permitted me to ask a lot of questions, which is my preferred way of learning. I will admit, that if someone is afraid or prevented in some way from asking for help it may be very difficult for them to pass. Every university has a 'learning skills' department to assist students with learning problems. But one still needs to make the effort to recognise that they have a problem. If your friend was just swapping institutions perhaps he didn't recognise that the problem was somehow connected to him, but instead blamed the university or the lecturers. But I don't know him, obviously, so this is just my two cents.

Now, please don't you think it would have been better if someone had opened his eyes and told him not to give up the day job? Especially if you consider this man had a family, while the other one was single?

Obviously his family is content for him to try this out, so what's ever so wrong with that? Far better for him to give it a go rather than being one of those people who say, 'I'm going to write a novel some day', and keep putting it off. He'll realise eventually if it is for him or not, but there's nothing wrong with giving it a go. There's nothing overly drastic about taking a year off teaching to try something new. If he truly doesn't have the necessary skill it should be up to his family or someone close to him who is impacted by the decision to take up writing full time who should be the one to 'break the news' that he isn't ready for this yet.

 

[Motokid]

"If he truly doesn't have the necessary skill it should be up to his family or someone close to him who is impacted by the decision to take up writing full time who should be the one to 'break the news' that he isn't ready for this yet."

What hurts a persons ego more? Hearing some very hard to swallow truth from a total stranger (read internet forum), or hearing it from a close family member or loved one?

I think the close family is way more inclined to blow smoke up your rear-end than tell you something you've worked very hard on is not up to snuff.

A total stranger yawning at something you've done can very easily be dismissed as "that person's an asshole", while a family member telling you something is boring will cut much deeper into your ego.

 

[Kookamoor]

I'll trust a family member or close friend's opinion more in either case - be it a reality check or constructive critisism. But the critisism still has to be CONSTRUCTIVE - not yawning and saying something is crap.

 

[Motokid]

"I'll trust a family member or close friend's opinion more in either case"

But if you have written crap, what are the chances that a family member or close friend will tell you you've written crap?

They might tell you it needs a little more work, or that there are areas that could use some attention...but would they tell you crap is crap? Maybe you have that kind of support system, but I doubt many others do.

Would they tell you they just couldn't finish it because it got too boring?

In some ways a total stranger might be more likely to give the most honest feedback you could ever get. They have no reason to worry about your feelings or your dreams and desires.

I know a girl who married a guy she met on the internet, and had only known for 6 months. Nobody in her family ever told her she was making a huge mistake. They all told her how happy they were for her, and threw her showers and all the crap. Less than 2 years later they were divorced and the family members all talk about how they knew she was making a mistake, but just didn't have the heart to potentially ruin her happiness at that particular time. Many times family members are not willing to potentially say something that could hurt feelings.

 

[leckert]

I would tend to lean towards Moto on this one.

HOWEVER -

The critique should be about the work's merit (or lack thereof), not the writer. I think a lot of writers (especially new, young writers) attach a lot of ego to their work. That isn't the problem of the reviewer, but the reviewer shouldn't worsen things by attacking them personally. (and I haven't seen any of that here, but I have elsewhere)

I also think that a lot of writers write and review in a vacuum. They don't rewrite, because they can't bear to "kill their darlings". They fall in love with their work, and let their friends and family read it. Their friends and family are obligated (in most cases) by some faulty sense of morality to say "oh, that's nice." "no,no, I really like it!" "You should be a writer!". This encourages them, and they decide to toss it out here for the "real world", expecting writers everywhere to lay down their pens and gather 'round the glowing brilliance that is their work. Now, the person in this situation needs to have some intestinal fortitude or they are going to be emotionally shredded, because they haven't separated their writing from themselves. Their sense of self worth is based on this writing. But, their reaction to "constructive criticism" is their CHOICE. If the reviewer writes "The dialogue is weak and stilted" and the writer reads "You can't write, why don't you die", with whom lies the fault?

I don't think critiques should be tempered based on the author. When one throws his or her proverbial hat into this ring, they should be mature enough to accept what they get. If they aren't, then they probably aren't ready to be published. Maybe they will lick their wounds, come back for more, and, eventually, build the requisite tolerence. Maybe they will run sobbing to their mothers and never come back again. Either way, the outcome is the decision of the writer, not the reviewer.

So, I guess I'm trying to say, be honest, but not personal.

At least that's what I want when someone reviews my work.