Critiquing Dos and Don'ts

[Lugh]

We do NOT want to see:

 

• Flames disguised as "honest opinions." Included in this category are self-indulgent zingers disguised as humor. Comparing the main character to a Martian in drag is neither witty nor helpful, since it tells the author nothing about what a Martian in drag looks or acts like, nor how to avoid this deadly and heretofore undiscovered characterization trap. If you thought the hero was too stupid to live, you are obligated to tell the author why you thought that, and specifically how he let this guy wander around in a daze when it doubtless looked to the writer like the hero was doing all kinds of neat and to-the-plot-point stuff.
• "Rah rah" loved it crits without explanation of what you actually liked. Was it the character interaction, the scene-setting, the snappy dialogue?
• "Hated it" crits with no explanation of what you thought did not work. Authors do not need their egos busted with some version of "This thing is just like (plug in author of your choice) but not as well written. It just didn't cut it for me. Sorry."
• "Clean up the [voice, pacing, dialogue, whatever] and you'll have a winner" crits with no explanation of how the writer should go about "cleaning up" that aspect of the writing.
• Straight line-crits that look more like an exercise in proofing/grading an English paper.
• Endless "suggestions" on how to bring the story's grammar into line with "accepted" practice. Such crits totally overlook the issue of style in writing, and completely hamstring an author trying to break outside the box of technically perfect, English-paper writing. Unless one of the following is true, these crits are probably not helpful:
• You, the critter, are a big-name author, a successful agent, or a professional editor with a proven track record in the publishing world
• The story is full of misspellings and egregiously bad grammar that clearly is not part of the story's voice
• Mere summaries of the plot. In our experience, too many critters skim the story, miss many important details, and then present a confused summary at odds with the actual plot, scaring the poor author into thinking he should sell his typewriter.

We DO want to see:

 

• Crits that address the critical aspects of any story, long or short:
• Hook: does the story grab you from the first line?
• Pacing: is there so much worldbuilding or unnecessary description/action that you find your mind wandering? Did one thing happen and now they've done nothing but discussed it with different people for half the word count? Do events never give a breather for the reader?
• Tension: is there something needing to be resolved that's important enough to keep the reader reading? Is the opening too long?
• Dialogue: is it stilted or "as you know, Bob" or anachronistic slang or otherwise dull, stupid, or inappropriate for the characters? Define "stilted" for the author, because it may be natural to the character to never use contractions.
• Characterization: are the characters well-rounded, believable, and human (or alien), or are they acting stupid on demand or unbelievably smart, debonair, and perfect?
• Plot: will someone notice if you forget to upload a chapter? Is every single scene necessary to drive the plot forward, or is it meandering like an oxbow river going nowhere in tortuous fashion?
• Foreshadowing: is the conclusion supported by the rest of the story, or did you pull a deus ex machina and gift your hero with sudden superpowers at the very end to pull him out of the mess you threw him in?
• Denouement: is the climax of your tale really the climax, or does it go by unnoticed by the reader and dribble to an unsatisfactory conclusion, or end abruptly leaving you thinking "Huh? Where's the rest?"
• Quality of writing: this encompasses the story as well as the actual prose. Beautiful style cannot disguise absence of story. Look beyond the clever turns of phrase. Is there a story hiding in there with a distinct beginning, middle, and end? On the other hand, is it all Tell and no Show? If so, good crits suggest better ways to engage the reader than simply baldly stating, "The writing is passive throughout." The objective is to help the writer learn how NOT to fall into these writing traps.
• Thoughtful line crits: these explain the change you're suggesting and don't merely cut words because they ring oddly on your ear or violate some "rule" you think should be followed. They also point out overuse of certain words or phrases (we all have pets), clichés, and inappropriate slang or anachronisms such as using "okay" or umbrellas in a medieval fantasy world.
• Overall impression: Leave this alone if you are unable to avoid value judgments. There is no such thing as an unrevisable story. There is such a thing as writers who don't want to do the work to revise it. But the best way to convince them to do so is to communicate your comments in a way that they'll accept. A crit is the communication, not dictation, of suggestions for revision. As a reader you are entitled to an opinion as to whether you liked or will remember this story. Your job is to try and help the writer polish the story to the best possible version of his/her vision for it. It does not mean that the story "would be great if you just did this."
• Publishability: this is a subjective criterion, but you can give your honest opinion as to:
• Is this story original in its take on the subject/plot? If it isn't, then do say what it is exactly like, though the similarities may arise from the obvious mix of ingredients (the writer having never read the piece) or of cryptomnesia. It is sufficient to say, "This is tired by now, and needs freshening. Some of the things you could change to freshen it are..."
• Is there a particular market you think might take it?
• Does this story seem to outright rip off characters or plots from somewhere else? Sometimes pieces are obviously fan-fic with the names changed.
• Is the writing crude, unpolished, amateurish, or overly flowery, purple, or long-winded?

ok I just want to make sure that it's understood that this is from another website I frequent called OtherWorlds Writer's Workshop

 

 

If you are doing a full novel crit for someone here are some tips, they are focused on publication, but many of them hold "true" no matter the final goal.

[AnytaSunday]

Critiquing is an art skill in itself. It's also an extremely good way to hone your own skills as a writer.

I have a KICK ASS critter, so I'm especially lucky.

 

As a critter myself, it's good to read over the list of what a good critiquer should be doing to refresh my mind--and to make sure my crits aren't getting lazy.

 

Thanks!

[hh5]

Critiquing is an art skill in itself. It's also an extremely good way to hone your own skills as a writer.

I have a KICK ASS critter, so I'm especially lucky.

 

As a critter myself, it's good to read over the list of what a good critiquer should be doing to refresh my mind--and to make sure my crits aren't getting lazy.

 

Thanks!

 

In the do's there seems tp be that artful language there ... it does mean that one has to know things like pacing, plot, etc ... the vocabulary and what it looks like in use ...

The real writer types would know it well compared to lesser-writer types

Its become learning by doing

 

I remember in my state college - required writing class - sometimes it was helpful and sometimes not - especially if you have to decode the handwriting

In those days they did not have prep writing courses ... or writing stories courses ... I haven't really looked into the writing story courses ... what prereqs are

 

I think I be stuck somewhere in the prep writing ... but those course are geared towards writing of papers ... something I have a distaste for because that req lots of reading

I think there those that can get overloaded by facts and arguments ... pity back then creative writing ... wasn't sold more ... I think it would help the weaker writers to appreciate writing more as they build up their skills

 

Thanks Lugh - nice to know I may have a few things to learn as my story gets edited

[jian_sierra]

Thanks for this Lugh. I really can't help but do a 'loved it' crit when a story blows me away. However, I think I do point out things I liked when this happens. I'll be more mindful of what I say when I crit then

[Sara Alva]

Critiquing is an art skill in itself. It's also an extremely good way to hone your own skills as a writer.

I have a KICK ASS critter, so I'm especially lucky.

 

As a critter myself, it's good to read over the list of what a good critiquer should be doing to refresh my mind--and to make sure my crits aren't getting lazy.

 

Thanks!

 

Anyta, you are a kick-ass critter yourself

 

Good post Lugh

[intune]

Good advice, thanks

[Marzipan]

Lugh, as you posted this to editor's corner, do you speak of review kind of critique or editor/beta-reading help?

 

I think those serve a different purpose and might be too much asked for every single reader to do a full blown literary analysis of what he/she has just read in a review. But you did have many very good points there on what to think while reading and commenting.

 

Giving a critique is a skill that needs to be practiced, it is something that can be learned. I personally appreciate if I get even one comment from your "do-category". Well I appreciate the "I love-comments" too

 

Maybe there could be a corner in this site where the skilled and/or willing critiquers could leave their detailled and thoughtful critiques on what ever story written. The story discussion threads are just that, disucssion threads And the reviews more like instant feedback. Hmm...

 

As for writer's help, betas and editors can give much assistance and support but their work is not to give critique. Critique is something given to a complete work. Right?

 

I love this post you started. (Sorry )

 

 

[TalonRider]

Maybe this will help, the definition for english-language learners.

 

a careful judgment in which you give your opinion about the good and bad parts of something (such as a piece of writing or a work of art)

▪ She wrote a radical critique of the philosopher's early essays. ▪ They gave a fair and honest critique of her art.

A good editor will give his/her thoughts about the chapter/story as part of the process in working with an author.

[Cia]

I have to say I treat the stories I read that allow online feedback the same. Be it a chapter or a full story, something I'm reading for fun, or something I'm reading for one of my authors. I'm just much more in depth for the writers I work with. I try to mention what I like or think works for the piece as well as what I don't like or think could be improved. I try not to overdo my critique if I think the piece needs a lot of work as a regular reader, fortunately, I rarely come across a piece of work that I can't at least find something good to say about it.

 

The key point for providing a critique is to speak to what you know. I'm moderately alright on grammar and the tech parts of punctuation and that sort of thing. My strength lies in visualizations, keeping the storyline flow and the actions of the characters consistent. I like to talk plot with my writers, see and feel why their characters do a certain thing, and what else they should be doing. It's why my story numbers as a beta reader is much higher than my story numbers as an editor.

 

The tips and suggestions for how to provide a critique that Lugh posted are very good. However, for a review or a comment in a forum I'd try to incorporate a few of the suggestions, not all of them. For a beta reader or an editor they are invaluable guides.

[Dannsar]

I think this is pretty good advice all round.

 

There are two things, though, that I think need to be said in addition. The first is kinda implied in what Lugh has quoted. This is that a critter needs to be sure they are giving advice and guidance, but it ends there. I have shied away from offering to edit or beta because I think I am too strong a personality and would be prone to getting involved to heavily in the story. The story must remain the work of the author, and they must have the freedom to feel they can reject criticism. Which brings me to the second point.

 

I have reviewed nearly every piece I have read so far on the site. And mostly writers have been very grown up. However two have been a bit off, and one has been downright sarcastic, even though the crit was measured and explicatory of what I saw as the issue - IMHO. Writers need to take criticism on and give it some thought. A backhanded, petulant rejection of a constructive crit is a waste of opportunity, and very demoralising for the critter. People who give thoughtful crits are not doing it to generally demonise a piece. There is a dead easy way to do that ... 'this is a piece of shit'... No critter who was interested in only being a wiseassed muppet would go far beyond that. So writers need to be open to ideas.

 

But as a first principle, they still have to be allowed to reject criticism if they feel they are in the right.

[Canuk]

I am not sure I will be ever brave enough to critique a story/chapter ever again!

 

 

 

I think what you have outlined Lugh is truly Rolls-Royce commentary (crits), and while I sincerely hope that one day I could meet those standards, you may have to accept that while people stories and poetry strive for perfection, so too will us laymen's "crits". I suppose all we can hope is that crits are sincere and based on evidence.

 

 

Many thanks for all you authors. I am so impressed that you are all willing to expose yourselves the way you do.

C

[Tejun]

Hey guys,

I am a member of what I like to call, the writing forges. It is a site that I will not name because I do not want to appear as I am plugging another site. But this site is full of some very talented and even published authors. I came there years ago with a story that I was soooooooooo proud of. I thought it was the greatest thing gifted unto mankind... ever. In moments it was set ablaze. My young ego could hardly take it. Thankfully, for some reason I did something a lot of amateur authors refuse to do, and I rewrote, using their suggestions. Wholly convinced of my story's complete unadulterated awesomeness I submitted it again. This time it melted into a glowing liquid from their responses. This process continued until my story emerged from the forge, gleaming, strong and unbreakable, complete.(probably not)

The way the site is designed, you must critique to submit. It is a point system I will not explain but it averages out that you have to critique three to four other authors works before you can submit one of your own. I have posted over twenty postings to the site. This means I have critiqued quite a few. Also, they are as ruthless with the critique of the critiques as they are with the stories. No lazy critiquing and no lazy writings.

 

So what I am saying is I want to read and I want to critique some pieces... Help some promising writers out, but I have already learned that some people are not 'into' this. I don't know what pieces I am allowed to respond to honestly. I don't want to offend anyone and get removed from the site or something.

 

My question is: Can I make a thread, call it, 'the gauntlet', and if anyone wants to be critiqued, and they promise not to cry if it is no done without any consideration except making the story better. P.S. I rarely critique punctuation or grammar unless it is so hugely horrible it impedes the story. This process is voluntary. Also I am looking for a few good critiquers Who would take pleasure in such a thread existing and would love helping.

[Andrew Q Gordon]

Tejun,

 

I think there are several things here - 1) I don't know that all authors here strive for publication perfection. What I mean is that the 'forge' process you outlined is much more applicible to a site that aspiring published authors go to. Some people just like to write and use GA as an outlet for sharing their work. Giving them the flaming liquid treatment isn't what they want or care to get. 2) Others might aspire to publication, but don't post here to be shredded by a critique. 3) Sometimes people are better crits than writers and some are better writers than crits. Some of us are neither. So I think that the system of 'must crit to post' is useful, it is also a bit exclusionary because some writers aren't good at giving criticism, constructive or otherwise - **raises hand**

 

Your idea of a place where folks can gather and give honest, brutually so at times feed back is a good one, but can I suggest you or someone else create a separate Group or Board? I say this because honestly, a lot of stuff I read, I just like. I don't care that it's not the best written or the most polished, but it is entertaining and enjoyable. I don't necessary want to see the work slashed and burnt before it gets posted. And while it is totally voluntary and totally up to me to click on or not, it is often tempting to peek in. That said, i would be interested in helping as best I can with the understanding I'm not a very good beta reader/critic.

 

Andy

[Tejun]

You said create a different group or board? Like a whole other website or is that something achievable within this site?

[Andrew Q Gordon]

You said create a different group or board? Like a whole other website or is that something achievable within this site?

 

 

I was thinking like a Yahoo group where you let anyone who wants to come play.

[TalonRider]

This topic is temporarily closed.