Learn to Navigate the Minefield of Critiques without Destroying Your Work

I’m a big fan of critique partners. For me, my crit partners give me the perspective I often need. They give me well thought out comments and help me see the holes in my manuscript.

BUT, and this is a big but, I’ve also seen promising writers almost destroyed through the critique process. It’s not just those groups that seek to build themselves up by putting others down that are the most dangerous, but even well-meaning groups can also destroy a story if you don’t approach the suggestions wisely.

Here are some things to look out for, in a critique partner, a group, and yourself.

People who want to build themselves up by putting others down. I don’t mind being told when I’ve got areas to improve, but someone showing off by putting me down isn’t something I tolerate.

• Individuals who tell you there are absolute rules in the world of publishing. Truthfully, the words ALWAYS and NEVER rarely have anything to do with the real world of publishing. 

• People who make personal comments without any specific suggestions. There isn’t anything helpful with comments like, “I just don’t care for the flavor of this scene.” Or even, “You’re really not a very good writer.” (I’ve actually been at a crit group meeting where someone said that.) Look for people who can give you specific feedback and suggest ways to improve. This goes for positive comments as well as negative ones. 

• Those in the group who always participate in critiquing, but never bring anything to have critiqued. If I’m going to attend a critique group, I expect everyone to participate. Not every time, but often enough to let me know they are also working at improving their own work. 

• Individuals who only have something nice to say. I appreciate that it’s hard to tell someone something isn’t working. But unless I get some truthful feedback I’m not going to improve.

Finally, I want to warn you about something you might be tempted to do when you get feedback. I’ve seen promising writers who accept everything said in a critique, to the point where they let others dilute their voice and destroy their work.

I’ve been too stubborn to have had this happen to me personally, but I’ve seen it happen—and the result isn’t pretty. Sure we should listen and evaluate what a critique partner says, but that doesn’t mean we have to agree.

How about you? What have been some of your experiences with critiques?

Edie Melson is the bestselling author of Social Media Marketing for Writers and a devotional for military families, Fighting Fear: Winning the War at Home When Your Soldier Leaves for Battle. She is a prolific freelance writer, editor, and co-director of the Blue Ridge Mountains Christian Writers Conference, as well a faculty member at numerous others. Visit her popular writing blog, The Write Conversation. 

To make reservations for the Blue Ridge Mountains Christian Writer's Conference, call 1.800.588.7222.

Comments

[Cathryn Smart]

Critiquing is the most delicate part of the process for many writers. I've always had really strict guidelines for critiquing in my writing classes because of an experience that I had at a public University.

I was one class away from graduation. The only seminar available was led by a professor whom the University had brought in for his New York publishing connections. I had never heard of him, so went in without preconceived ideas.

Turned out that he was a brutal critiquer who debased every thought that wasn't exactly like his. He told me that my previously award-winning material was useless--it was a non-story about non-people--which he hated. His standard for the class was, "Dazzle me." He had such a hold on the students that they were all afraid to disagree with him, so his attitude toward me encouraged them to follow suit. Even though privately they were saying they appreciated my work, in class they pounced, and then when time came for us all to vote on who was the most "helpful" member of the class, I (who was considered among the top ten percent of graduate student teachers that year) was voted at the bottom. The manipulation was complete.

This teacher gave no guidelines for success, nor would he submit to University policies (for instance, he forced us all to take an incomplete on the semester because he had a personal deadline, then marked us down because we didn't revise during that time). The short story is that I couldn't withdraw from the class because no others were available, and he gave all of us except his two favorites poor grades. I challenged the grade and lost because of University politics. He effectively destroyed my academic career by preventing me from getting a PhD.

I now know that this was a form of harassment. Later, I heard he was sent away somewhere to write for two years, but because he was tenured, he still has the power to affect writers' lives.

This is an extreme case where critiquing was devastating. In my own classes, though, I have had students say to me that for the first time they had been able to write about personal issues (like the death of a sister from cancer) because they felt safe and confident in their writing as a result of the encouragement they had received in the class.

I cannot emphasize enough that critiquing is a trust that should not be violated. Writers are sensitive people, especially good ones! We all need to support each other.

[Rick Barry]

When I've moderated critique groups I start by emphasizing balance. If the author has done something we like or appreciate, let's start with that to make sure she doesn't change it. Then move on to your constructive suggestion.

For me, it's nice to hear someone say, "I like it!" But what I want to hear even more is, "Do you know what might make that scene even better? Consider doing this..." Our human nature hopes for praise, but no passage is so perfect that it can't be made a tad better.