#Currently rereading the first issue for a more thorough review/discussion

[lorem-ipsum-2099]

LYLAs by Devmayla Pramanik

(Artist behind Miguel O’Hara: Spider-Man 2099 released TODAY)

Go read the first issue if you haven’t already! Let’s make sure Pramanik knows how much we love his art and Marvel how much we love Miguel 😤.

[brynwrites]

How To Give Useful Critique.

Specifically for fiction oriented feedback, but with concepts worthwhile for all areas of critiquing.

Originally requested by @ephirae.

The Devil is in the Details.

If you signed up to give feedback on a manuscript, be prepared to do two things:

1. For every opinion you give, explain why. 

What lead you to the conclusion you reached? If you don’t know this, you may need to reread a few times until you figure it out.

2. For every specific situation, concept, or relationship the writer asks about, describe your interpretation back to them. 

Give a short summary, whether its of what you believe happened, or how you think that piece of world building works, or why you believe those characters came to that conclusion, or why the PoV character is feeling these emotions. 

Often problems appearing toward the end of a manuscript are caused by misunderstandings in earlier segments. If you tell the writer your interpretation of the key events as you go, they can identity the root of those problems much easier.

Negative Critique: Courtesy Is Key.

Unless you are either (a) a professional editor who’s being paid to whip the manuscript into shape or (b) a long time critique partner with a strong relationship with the author, always be as kind and gentle with negative critique as you can. If a writer trusts you enough to let you look at something they poured their soul into, it’s your responsibility to be honest but also courteous.

Try to avoid:

Sarcasm; “Like that would ever happen.”

Absolutes; “This would NEVER happen.”

Abruptness; “Bad. Change.”

Arrogance; “This wouldn’t happen. [My way] would. Do it instead.”

Better ways to approach negative critique:

Make it clear that you understand the problem might not be in the writer’s ideas, but your interpretation of them. Don’t harp on a writer’s creativity-- guide them towards explaining their awesome concepts better!

Respect the time and effort that’s already gone into the writing by demonstrating that this work as valuable, even if major changes are still needed. Example: ”You have a lot of great concepts here, like [this and this], but I think they would hit home a lot harder if you rewrote the chapter [like this], while still including [the good aspects of the current chapter].”

Your personal writing style is unique to you. Pick out incidences of passive voice, filter words, and bulky or awkward sentences, but don’t try to rewrite sentences to fit your personal preferences unless you’ve already talked it over with the writer in length.

All your critiques are only your opinion, and they aren’t necessarily the same opinions of this writer’s future publisher. Mention when a writer’s use or breakage of a “writing rule” throws you off, but don’t claim your preferred way is the correct way.

Good examples of courteous negative critique:

Plot--

“As I understand it, [this situation] happened because of [these reasons]. It seems like [these other reasons] should have prevented [the situation] from playing out that way. I thought something like [this] made more sense based on [these reasons].”

Character--

“I had a hard time connecting with [this character], because of [this reason]. Lines like [this one here] implied they [exhibited these goals or traits], but without [this addition or removal], I couldn’t quite believe them.”

Prose--

“The [specific prose topic] between [this line] and [this line] felt a little stunted to me. The first time I read through it, [I had this reaction]. [These reasons] contributed to this feeling.”

Notice how these replies (a) show where in the manuscript the issue arose, (b) state that a change is needed without being rude, (c) imply the reader knows the mistake may be on the interpretation end, and (d) gives specific details on why the reader came to the conclusions they did.

Not all negative critique needs to go so in depth, but if you’re picking out something which requires significant or difficult changes, always take the time to provide all the details the writer will need.

Positives Critique: Explanations are the New Vague.

A writer gets back character reviews from four critiquers, as follows:

“I really liked them, especially the protagonist!”

“Good characters. I enjoyed their conversations.”

“I thought the characters were pretty fleshed out, nice job.”

“I couldn’t differentiate between any of the character. Their personalities and goals need to be fleshed out more.”

Only a quarter of these reviews are negative, but they leave the writer feeling incredibly confused and worried. Maybe the first three critiquers were just being overly positive? Maybe they’re not as analytical as the last critiquer? Maybe they projected personalities onto the characters? Maybe they just don’t want to hurt my feelings?

If the writer only received the first three reviews, it would’ve been easy to accept that their characters are good, and move on, but that one negative review is enough to convince them maybe things aren’t as well off as they seem.

Now look at the same situation, but in which the positive critiquers are more detailed in their reviews:

“I really liked the protagonist! She’s clearly book smart, with her use of large words and how she brings theories into the discussion, but the way she notices the subtle changes in her sister’s expression make me think she knows a lot about people. She craftily manipulates the conversation when she decides she wants to know more about the temple’s explosion, and she’s quick to realize when her sister is lying. Her sister, on the other hand...”

“Good characters. I enjoyed the way their dialogue revealed more about their goals, especially in the side characters. I could tell that...”

“I thought the characters were pretty fleshed out. I liked the little habits and quirks you gave them, like the protagonist's finger tapping. The way the sisters do their hair seems to be intrinsic to their personalities, particularly...”

“I couldn’t differentiate between any of the character. Their personalities and goals need to be fleshed out.”

The writer’s whole view of this negative critique suddenly changes. The positive cirtiquers were obviously reading critically, and could pick out many differences between the characters, as well as their goals and basic personality traits.

Maybe the negative critiquer wasn’t reading very carefully, or maybe they’re accustomed to books in which the reader is explicitly told things about the characters instead of implying and hinting and showing. Whatever the case, the writer can breathe easy knowing that analytical readers are still understanding and enjoying their characters the way it’s meant to be enjoyed.

Giving detailed positive critique is also good, even when there are things which need to be fixed, because it helps the writer know what was worked well and should therefore be kept when they make adjustments.

The take away: While vague positive critique is certainly better than ignoring the good aspects of a story, telling the writer why you feel positively towards that area of the story can (almost literally) save your writer’s life.

The Rules are What We Make of Them.

Sometimes abruptness is okay. 

Granted that the writer asked for this level of critique to begin with, if you already explained that you’re picking out filter words, repeated words, typos, or other small fixes, giving detailed explanations on why these things should be fixed can get tedious and feel demeaning towards the writer. 

If you’re having trouble putting your reasoning for something into words, you can always just let the writer know to ask you if they want a more thorough explanation of why you feel a certain way about a plot or character or prose choice.

If you’re critiquing for a good friend, or someone who you really jive with, they might not mind sarcasm and low blows, and sometimes you have special circumstances where the writer wants you to be vague.

And somethings we’re just human. We won’t always be perfect critiquers.

It never hurts your honor as a critiquer to apologize. If you realize after the fact that you were too harsh, or too vague, or too anything -- let the writer know: 

“Hey, I’m sorry if my feedback came across as overly negative! Despite how I may have sounded, I really enjoyed this chapter, especially [this and this and that other thing]. I think it has a lot of potential and I can’t wait to read more!”

Want to learn more about critique in fiction? Check out these articles on...

Beta Readers

Critique Partners

Dealing with Critique