Comments on: on critiques

By: Ieva

Ieva — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 20:43:26 +0000

Well, being picky is a very different thing from being nasty. I think so. Mostly, if the crit has 100+ points then, well, most of them are skimmed, and only the useful ones are kept. And, no, I wasn’t offended in any way, you still know how I tick.

Besides, it’s fairly impossible to make a dozen points about the *story*, no matter how picky you are. Most of the comments are about language and style, and that’s fine.

By: Russ

Russ — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 22:32:45 +0000

This appeared, it seems, at a time when I wasn’t following your blog faithfully. A couple of days ago I saw a reference to dealing with critiques from people you know. I had to look this up because of a question that’s been on my mind along those lines for a long time. I could just email you my question, but, frankly, I’m embarrassed to. But given this opening…

My critiques for your last few stories through critters were extreme detailed (another way of saying very picky). To my mind I was being helpful, yet I’ve come to realize I might be crushed to receive such a “helpful” critique, especially if it had come from you. I’m wondering how much injury to your spirit I might have done.

There is a big difference for me in critiques from people I know and from people I know only as names on critiques. A critique from someone who I know is fair in comments that point out major flaws in a story I thought was good is painful, embarrassing, and (if on target about something important to me to get right) humiliating. I’ve always found your critiques and comments to be couched in very considerate language. Still, if you were to point out I’ve written ineptly, not just carelessly, that has the power to sting because I have no doubt that your comment is fair and perceptive. I feel that I have let you down.

It someone else points out the same thing, it matters much less. I’m not seeking their approval in the same way that I would be seeking yours.

So, if any of my critiques drew blood, it just means I did those critiques thoughtlessly, and I apologize.

Sorry, I don’t think I have anything theoretical to add to the discussion.

By: ieva

ieva — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 23:06:14 +0000

@Barvins
“Now, one point still stands – why are you afraid of crits that know you personally? Really, what’s the difference?”
Hmm. I guess it’s because I’m taking reviews on my work personally. I know it’s not cool and I’m trying to fix it but still, every time I receive a bad crit I think whether the reviewer likes me or not. With random people, I couldn’t care less. With people I know, I do care, and I can hurt a lot, especially if I think I have proved myself to be a loser to somebody who takes pleasure in that. Or, even worse, to somebody who, up to this point, believed I’m mighty cool.

By: ieva

ieva — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:35:21 +0000

@Barvins
“So, the problem is, how do you know whether this crit is not in your audience and can be ignored, or he could have been in your audience if you just have made some small adjustments?”
Well, I guess that’s pretty much solved once my stories get published, since I’ll be sending them to niche magazines. A SF magazine editor wouldn’t publish something that isn’t SF (even if she likes the piece), and a (sensible) publisher would have my novel marketed for a specific audience. The blurb and the writing would help to skim down to more precise audience. (Theoretically, of course.) So if a dedicated SF reader says my SF sucks because [insert rant here], I think I should be able to read it without hanging myself in between sentences and figure out whether he is right or not.

By: ieva

ieva — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:22:50 +0000

@Holly Lisle
*ponders*
OK, I made myself not clear. (I guess there’s a better way to express it but I like this sentence as it came out.) There is no value in “you suck” critique (because the quality of the work doesn’t depend on the personality of the writer… at least I hope so, or there’s no use in taking courses). There is also little value in “my eyes are bleeding because I hate/don’t get your genre/subject/voice/values” critiques.
But I do believe that there is value in crits that come from people who have chosen your work for reading for some valid reason (genre, cover, blurb, subject, first lines, a paragraph from the middle, gutter margins..no, not gutter margins) and were disappointed. I think that the most advice on how to write well is basically “how to write in a continuous manner”. To simplify, how to start with a thriller and end with a thriller, not with a (however beautifully written) magical realism, or other way around.
I think that mostly people are irked (even if they can’t put their finger on it) if they are set in a world with the inner rules and values (applying both to the world described and in the style/genre/voice/POV) and end up deceived. It takes a Trusted Reader to tell *why* that particular thing doesn’t work, but most of the readers will pick on these things without really knowing why (and perhaps will offer a fix that makes me go in “what the heck?!” mode).

So in the end, IMO, the question is two-fold:
1) how to learn to not mind crits that are destructive, because there will be crits (provided I’m not willing to close my ears and sing “nanananananaaaa, I don’t hear you” every time somebody says “I read your story and…”),
2) how to learn to squeeze valuable things out of all crits (actually, the worst plot holes in my stories are usually picked up by people who didn’t like them by definition, because the ones who like these stories just jump over the holes without bothering to notice).

By: Holly Lisle

Holly Lisle — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:16:55 +0000

Have to differ here. There is NO value whatsoever in a “you suck” critique. None.

Your writing sucks? Sure. If the crit is objective, can point out flaws in your plotting or characterization, and can offer clear reasons why these are flaws, then you can benefit from a “your writing sucks” critique.

But there’s nothing objective in a “you suck, my eyes are bleeding” crit. People think because they like something it’s good, or because they hate something it’s bad. Ain’t so. People love a lot of things that are objectively horrible—that is, someone who knows how to tell stories can go in and point out hideous flaws in the work—and they hate work that is tight, compelling, brilliantly plotted, beautifully written…and about some subject they just don’t like.

Reviews are, for the most part, either worthless or downright destructive because of this one fact. Just because someone likes something doesn’t mean it’s good, just because he hates it doesn’t mean it’s bad. It just means his bias doesn’t have anything to do with the work in question.

By: Barvins

Barvins — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:03:06 +0000

“your writing sucks not because your story is flawed, it sucks because you suck as a writer, and you suck big time”
If some say that you suck and others say that you don’t, it can mean two things:
1) You suck, and those who tell you that you don’t suck are lying, because they need something from you.
2) You are making something that is niche product and it just can not be liked by everyone – you can safely ignore the ones that don’t like you, because they are not in your audience and you don’t write for them. That’s like the newspaper editors can safely ignore my rants that sports pages are worthless and just take up space – those pages are not there for me but for all the other guys, and it’s better for editors to scare off me than the numerous other guys. Another example – I can safely ignore you if you don’t like my new song, because I didn’t write it for you, but just to amuse myself – it would be pointless to feel bad if you don’t like it, because I didn’t even try to make it to your taste.
So, the problem is, how do you know whether this crit is not in your audience and can be ignored, or he could have been in your audience if you just have made some small adjustments? It shouldn’t be hard – if the crit likes at least something, listen and think what’s relevant, if the crit tells you to jump off the cliff, you shouldn’t be wasting your time, there’s nothing you can do, except, maybe if you like to fight just for the sake of fight, not to win. It’s like atheist trolling in christian forums – good bloody fight, but nobody switches sides.

Now, one point still stands – why are you afraid of crits that know you personally? Really, what’s the difference? Because, if you know a person, it doesn’t mean that you must have identical taste in writing. Is it that they can tell you something bad face-to-face, where you don’t have time to think and react decently?