Other How Should You Critique Other People's Writing?

[Moonshadow]

Hello Writers!

I've had an internal dilemma for a few months now that I've failed to talk about until now. The center of it all is in my creative writing class where we have to critique other people's writings they submit to us. At first I saw how beneficial the process can be, since if you see flaws in other people's writings you can see your own writing the same way. However I feel the process now as harsh. The reason could be my mixed feelings about writing in general. It's a form of art, which is another way of saying, people will love it and hate it. You can make your writing as good as you can, but there will be one person who has their opinion and is entitled to it. But, if you want to display your best than you'll need some help.

In the class the submissions are anonymous and is read by several groups in the class. But whenever I hear other groups speak about the subject, they feel very harsh and foreboding. I had lost entire confidence in my own piece because people were bashing on it without giving very powerful advice. I feel like they fail to realize the person behind every piece and what they give up as they write. Authors give a part of themselves in every word on the page, and when they feel like people are ripping it apart, they feel like THEY are being ripped apart. Which is a feeling I don't wish upon anyone.

So, I've been wanting to discuss the topic of critiquing others work with the class. I'm trying to gather up writers and authors' own tips and feelings about the subject of critiquing in order to make a stronger arguments and show the class how we really should be doing this.

I feel like I shouldn't keep pushing my feelings away about the subject because it's a powerful technique in the writing world. But I want to see where people draw the line of critiquing personally, and as a soon to be professional writer.

 

[Windsock]

If they ask for it, you have every right to be as brutal as you please towards them.

 

[Moonshadow]

If they ask for it, you have every right to be as brutal as you please towards them.

Yeah, but there's always a emotional component with it. It's easier to bash someone's work that isn't your own, but it doesn't build them up.

 

[Windsock]

Don't get how it's emotional.

 

[Moonshadow]

Don't get how it's emotional.

Have you ever written a story before?

 

[Windsock]

Yeah, but I don't get how you have to get emotional when discussing a story's pitfalls and what you think went wrong with it.

 

[Myrta]

I think that feelings should never even come into equation. Yes, I understand that writing is very personal and that having your work insulted can feel as if you have been insulted, but this is simply not the case. Writing is a skill that can and should be polished, especially if you want to become a professional writer. Feedback is essential. Then again, you absolutely aren't obliged to take everything they tell you seriously.

When it comes to someone criticizing your writing, you just need to think critically about the feedback you've been given. Do they have a point or not? Since it's a class, you have to consider the possibility of people not even caring about your writing and just churning out a critique because they have to. I guess that the key lies in a certain balance of humility and confidence. You need to be humble enough to accept that you aren't perfect and that you can learn from your peers, but confident enough to recognize your own worth.

As for writing your critiques, just write the kind of critiques you'd like to read about your own work. Don't be afraid to point out the bad things, but don't get personal. Never insult the writer. If you do criticize something, explain why, don't just say "x sucks because I don't like it." Point out the good things, too. If you do all of this and the writer in question still gets hurt, then it's their problem.

 

[Saccharine Cyanide]

The critiques are anonymous? That's kinda strange. : /
I would think people would be harsher if they didn't have their name attached to a critique.

On the critiquer's side, I've heard the advice that for every couple of things that you suggest a writer improve, you also include something about the work that you liked. Not just because it softens the blow, but because knowing what to keep doing is almost as important as knowing what to stop doing. People aren't perfect; they're going to get discouraged by constant negative feedback even if it's constructive.

On the writer's side, it does take a little bit of time and mental effort to separate yourself from your writing, to understand that they're not critiquing you personally but what you wrote. That can't be helped, but it gets easier the more and more you subject your writing to critique.

 

[Seldil]

Myrta gave excellent advice. If you want to be a professional writer then you will have to accept that people will say harsh things about your work. Even if what they say is not particularly constructive criticism you still need to try to get whatever benefit you can from it. That is not to say that you should make any changes based on what they say. It is your work after all, but maybe they will give you insight into a different point of view.


My rule is if someone makes an open post of their work I will only make positive comments. I won't tell them something that is terrible is good but I will focus on the positives.


If someone asks for criticisms don’t hold back, a lot of times the harsh truth is what they need.


Yes it hurts, yes every writer feels it, and no I'm pretty sure it never gets easier. It's just something you will deal with if you want to write.

 

[Moonshadow]

Myrta Saccharine Cyanide Seldil

I love the advice that you've all given. I can start to see the value in the criticism in the class, yet I feel like there's an unbalance in class. I think it's the fact I can't face whoever wrote it and give them my sincere feelings/tips on the piece. Instead, my opinions are supressed by louder voices in the class and therefore people just see pieces as really good and really bad to the point there's no hope for them.

But, I will keep these tips in mind and it's greatly appreciated!

 

[Windsock]

You're welcome! Another great day saved greatly by the greatest of them all, me!

I am great!

 

[AThiefOfSpades]

Emotionally charged "I hate it and it sucks" vs "I love it and it rocks" is not a fucking critique. From what I've read, your English teacher sucks ass. Here's why: A critique is when people explain what you've done wrong and explain what you've done right. No emotions should be attached, unless part of the critique is how well the author evoked or didn't evoke certain emotions. If your teacher isn't enforcing how critiques should be and is leading or allowing discussions based solely on non-factual opinions, they're not doing their job.

Sorry if I read that wrong or am somehow being offensive. I'm trying to be candid and I gave good reasons why I feel what I feel. So. I'm done with that. Bye!

 

[Eye of Nowhere]

Myrta Saccharine Cyanide Seldil

I love the advice that you've all given. I can start to see the value in the criticism in the class, yet I feel like there's an unbalance in class. I think it's the fact I can't face whoever wrote it and give them my sincere feelings/tips on the piece. Instead, my opinions are supressed by louder voices in the class and therefore people just see pieces as really good and really bad to the point there's no hope for them.

But, I will keep these tips in mind and it's greatly appreciated!

Giving people your honest critique is best done with an open and motivated analysis of their written piece on several subjects. Subjects such as grammar, spelling and punctuation must only be approached in an objective manner. They are known sets of rules. No further attention should be given to these subjects and they should be kept short and to the point, with examples or just flagged on a copy of the written piece for reference.

Subjective matters such as characters, storylines, and so forth, will attract the louder voices. They'll go with their "feeling" and they will merely throw out unfounded criticism or praise. The trick to giving a good critique ( note that critique and criticism are not the same thing) is detaching your personal feeling from the piece. You should place yourself in the shoes of the target audience. Is the piece up to par for the target audiences? Would children enjoy this children's book? Does the story follow a coherent storyline? If not, why? Where does it falter? Do the characters feel relatable? Would they be relatable for the audience? No? Why do you think they don't?

A critique can also become an open dialogue with the writer. Perhaps you missed something? Perhaps he/she didn't explain a crutcial part of the story? You're, of course, not looking to come to the same conclusion as the writer. It's perfectly alright to dislike a story. But when you critique it, you must be able to offer a detailed insight to the motivation behind your opinion. Only then could you offers food for thought to the writer. Yelling loudly gets you short-term attention. Providing content will leave a more lasting impact. or perhaps it won't. That's up to the writer.

 

[Hall Kervean]

On the critiquer's side, I've heard the advice that for every couple of things that you suggest a writer improve, you also include something about the work that you liked.

It also allows the critiquer to examine their own work for improvements as they see an element they like in a story and "steal" it, so to speak.

 

[thoughtless]

If a critiquer is only bashing whatever they're critiquing then they're fucking terrible at doing their job. It's not beneficial to anyone and only helps the writer feel more like shit. Similarly, if they're only praising whatever they're critiquing then they're also fucking terrible at doing their job.

The best way to critique is to offer both what someone does correctly and both what could be improved. This way the author knows what is already effective about their writing and what needs to be changed so that it can be more effective. Respect is a huge thing, and while a critique may need to be heavy-handed, it should never be outright mean and destructive.

So no, the problem with the critiquers in your class isn't that they're harsh, it's more that they probably aren't giving you any useful advice.

 

[wonderandawe]

I'd balance good and bad. Writers need to know what they are doing well to continue doing that. But they also need to know what they are doing poorly to fix it.

Also, the tone and wording of your criticism should be sympathetic to the writer. Yes, you could be blunt. Yes, writers should get use to horrible critics.

But don't be that person who says "Your sentence structure sucks. It's the worse sentence structure I've ever seen."

Instead say "You have quite a few run on sentences. It makes your writing hard to read. Try using Hemingway App to capture which sentences are hard to read and consider rewriting them."