good critique, bad critique
If I had listened to every single thing every person of critique has ever said about my writing, and made changes accordingly...my writing would suck.
If I had ignored every critique..my writing would suck.
Yes...it's a quasi-quandary. How to tell the good stuff from the bad?
So first consider the person who provided the critique. An agent, editor, published author, unpublished writer, or an avid reader? What matters most is that you love, love, love (or at least admire) that person's work. And if the person doesn't write, that they read a lot in your genre.
And then you have to consult your gut. And I don't mean that queasy feeling you get immediately following a difficult critique.
Once an editor at a conference told me that I had too much distance from my main character. He gave me specific examples in my writing. I'd hoped for a book contract on the spot, so his critique really disappointed me. After I finished drowning my sorrows in chocolate, though, I realized he had a point and started experimenting.
The experience made me more aware of POV, and got me to pay more attention to how that intimate bond between writer and reader unfolds on the page.
Another editor's critique about my voice and character development (different book, different conference) cut to the bone. But after I finished drowning my sorrows in chocolate, I realized she didn't have a point. Her comments did not help me improve my writing. And I didn't admire, admire, admire her books.
There are a few more rules of thumb--
if you get the same feedback from three or more people...it's time to listen.
if the feedback is too general, ask for specifics.
first pages of a novel are often the hardest to get right, so don't be discouraged by first page critiques.
when you critique others-- tell the writer what you like about their piece first, be constructive, and be specific. (every negative critique I've ever gotten is still echoing in a scary part of my brain).
The SCBWI website has a comprehensive how-to on critique groups.
If I had ignored every critique..my writing would suck.
Yes...it's a quasi-quandary. How to tell the good stuff from the bad?
So first consider the person who provided the critique. An agent, editor, published author, unpublished writer, or an avid reader? What matters most is that you love, love, love (or at least admire) that person's work. And if the person doesn't write, that they read a lot in your genre.
And then you have to consult your gut. And I don't mean that queasy feeling you get immediately following a difficult critique.
Once an editor at a conference told me that I had too much distance from my main character. He gave me specific examples in my writing. I'd hoped for a book contract on the spot, so his critique really disappointed me. After I finished drowning my sorrows in chocolate, though, I realized he had a point and started experimenting.
The experience made me more aware of POV, and got me to pay more attention to how that intimate bond between writer and reader unfolds on the page.
Another editor's critique about my voice and character development (different book, different conference) cut to the bone. But after I finished drowning my sorrows in chocolate, I realized she didn't have a point. Her comments did not help me improve my writing. And I didn't admire, admire, admire her books.
There are a few more rules of thumb--
if you get the same feedback from three or more people...it's time to listen.
if the feedback is too general, ask for specifics.
first pages of a novel are often the hardest to get right, so don't be discouraged by first page critiques.
when you critique others-- tell the writer what you like about their piece first, be constructive, and be specific. (every negative critique I've ever gotten is still echoing in a scary part of my brain).
The SCBWI website has a comprehensive how-to on critique groups.