The Abilities of a Good Critiquer
The other day in the comments, Lurker Monkey said something about good critiques and the quality of your critiquers or beta readers. He mentioned secreting them away or some such, under lock and key. And generally, I have four critique partners, three in Florida I conference call into, and one here. I would kidnap any one of them and lock them away without much provocation. That's what makes me scary. ;-)
So I started thinking about what makes a good critique--a critique that works for ME (may not be what YOU are looking for). And it is about the abilities of a critiquer. This is what I came up with:
- An ability to find those obnoxious little errors and "catches" that you have missed DESPITE having read your own chapter fifty times. And ability to spot continuity issues and bits of dialogue that have lost the pattern you originally gave to your characters' patter. BUT . . . they do not cross out your adjectives and insert their own. They might offer a suggestion here or there, but they know it is your work. Suggesting replaements for your words is hubris. (A few words, maybe, whole paragraph . . . no.)
- An ability to spot when you have inserted yourself into your story. This is subtle, but good crtiquers can spot when you have been so absolutely CLEVER that you cannot part with a certain phrase because damn, it is a work of art. The only problem is the character's point of view. That person would NEVER come up with such a clever phrase. Nope. That's YOU. Author. They force you to remove it. You know they are right.
- An ability to tell you whole chapters and scenes can be cut. (Yes, Lurker Monkey, I GET IT NOW.) This is born from an ability to look at the chapter at hand, and the larger scope of the book's pacing as a whole.
- An ability to look at each character and ask "What function does this secondary SERVE?" Characters are not clever little marionettes to move in and out of set pieces. They have to serve a function more than making the author look clever or to spout screenplay dialogue. If you have that issue, go write something like Pulp Fiction, which is predicated on clever dialogue.
- An ability to see the macro world. The theme. And yet not lose sight of it when analyzing the micro.
- An ability to do all this and verbalize it in a way that is not rude, unsupportive, or hopelessly about showcasing the cleverness of the critiquer.
- An ability to ask piercing and open-ended questions. Most of them begin with WHY?
- And finally, an ability to be ever aware that the book and work is the author's own. Telling someone "I would have written it this way . . ." is to me about the rudest thing one writer can say to another. It's about doing all this in a suggestive sense, but not a rewrite sense.
36 comments:
Erica, your criteria for critiques is why I feel you should be teaching college level creative writing - your process is exactly like my Eng. Lit professor's.
If I could find a crit-partner who utilized your ways, I'd be a very happy camper indeed. I've tested the crit waters and have yet to find anyone who won't refrain from the "This is how I would have written it" advice. I'd rather hear, "Where are you going with this?" which would prompt me to re-visit the scene.
Let me know when you take a job teaching. I'll enroll as "teacher's pet" lol.
Hi Kath:
Thanks! And you know . . . I am convinced in every town, in every place, and online, there are people who share this viewpoint. It's just a question of trying them out/finding them/and literally handing them a list like this and saying, "What are your thoughts on this?"
E
Great list! Now here's how I would have written it ... just kidding. :)
I could never express the value of good criticism. Literally, everything I've learned in the past few years has been the result of getting good criticism.
The first thing for me, though, was learning how not to argue with criticism, but just let it simmer until the rush of emotion wears off and I can objectively consider it.
These are good guidelines. Best to be upfront about what's to be expected, what you want going in. Most people will follow the rules if they know what they are.
Monkey Man:
Sometimes I think our meetings are shorter because that is precisely what is happening. I tend to go, "Hmm . . . " and not say much, Or say, "I was aiming for this . . . you didn't get that? Why?" Try to see where the problem piece is. And as you know . . . my new editor . . . well, holy crap, but the book is really getting better at every word.
E
Jude:
I don't know that they're rules per se. But I can't imagine a valid critique that wouldn't follow this. Would you change any of these?
E
An ability to spot when you have inserted yourself into your story...
I know what you're getting at with this, and I mostly agree; but, I think it's okay to use language for effect sometimes, even if it might be a little more sophisticated than what your POV character would think or use in dialogue. To Kill a Mockingbird is an example where this occurs throughout. Also, much of James Lee Burke's work. Just to name a couple.
Special thanks for the story. Parts of it surely touch on places a lot of us have been.
This is a wonderful list. We ask a lot of our critiquers!
I wonder if I would add the desire to see your work be as good as it could be, and the perspective of seeing a ms with fresh eyes at every turn of revision... Or is that asking too much?
Jude:
I think within the patter and rhythm of some work, it's OK. But you have to be cautious. And once again, a good critiquer can spot when it's for the author to display clever, versus when it's a really lyrical piece or phrase that genuinely deserves being in there. And that falls to believability.
E
Oh, Joe . . . thank you SO much. That means a lot to me. Really.
E
Heather:
NO! Not asking too much.
The MOTIVATION of a critiquer, while not something you can control, comes VERY much into the play and interplay of egos in critiquing. If you have ever watched a group devolve over jealousy, then you know what that is. I have NEVER ONCE (!!!!!) offered a critique in my group without there being a LOT of love behind it. JVZ knows that when I wrote him once that I was MORE excited over him being close to a sale than ME being close to one, it wasn't empty B.S. I WANT and with every part of my BEING want my friends to enjoy success as writers--whatever their definition is of that.
And we (my group) sometimes bring the same chapters five times. Each time . . . I'm reading it with fresh eyes.
E
Jude,
I gotta disagree with you on that one ... TKAMB is a stylistic masterpiece that mixes the narrative voice of a child with that of an adult who is writing her own memoirs. It never departs from its own internal rules, much less "throughout."
I think using language for effect is an extremely dangerous game for a writer to play--and this is something near and dear to my heart since I'm guilty of it ALL the time. All it does is pull the reader from the rabbit hole and remind them they are reading.
Lurker:
I totally agree. Even commented at your story today. I think sometimes you have to sacrifice some good phrases to achieve artistic integrity in your story.
E
Excellent list, Erica. I'm bookmarking this post. Also excellent comments.
I find I need different types of critique at different times in the process. Sometimes I want a general impression, other times I need help with a specific problem, and sometimes I need that deep look into the whole story. Different people in my crit. group have skills in certain areas, and I will often ask them for help in their area of expertise.
What I try to avoid as a writer is wasting my groups time. Critiquing takes a lot of time and effort. I try to be very specific about what kind of critique I am seeking at a particular time in my process -- depending on what I'm trying to spruce up.
Having never read TKAMB, considering the era in which it was written, wasn't that sort of the "style" of the times? What I mean to ask is, isn't TKAMB more of a lit. fic., which is sort of apple and oranges to the style of genre fiction? (You know I'm clueless when it comes to that...)
I've been trying to read The Judgment of Paris, and let me tell you, it's killing me - I feel like I'm on a sinking ship while reading it, but I keep telling myself that that's just how books were written then (a nice way of saying I find the book boring, lol). It's just not a fun read, or one I can easily get into.
P.S. If any of your followers are looking for a crit partner and can follow your basic rules, I'd love to hook up.
I confess I'm guilty of rewriting sometimes. I generally mean it in the sense that "to vary your sentences" or "to pick up pacing" but I can see how it can definitely NOT be helpful. Thanks for the reminder not to rewrite!
Ny crit group and I don't really socialize much, but we met last night and talked for an hour before hitting our pages. We're lucky in that we have a wonderful rapport. It's a great place to vent with folks who really understand.
I had to tell one of them who was resurrecting an old story that the writing just wasn't up to par. I suggested he go back and re-draft it from scratch, using the themes and characters and plot. He agreed it was a valid option.
That's the kind of critique rapport it's taken us four years to achieve.
I would add that pointing out what works is VERY helpful and important. It has the nice effect of soothing ruffled emotions. But more importantly, newer writers (and sometimes experienced ones!) sometimes don't know the strengths in their own work. That just happened to me, in fact, and went a long way in strengthening my voice.
While we're on critique, my fellow editors and I are offering first page crits (up to 250 words) on short stories over at http://electricspec.blogspot.com
We've had a great time with it and I've gotten a lot of personal thank yous and repeat players, so it must be a little bit worthwhile.
I love doing critique! I get to talk about it at a conference this fall and it's my favorite subject because it helps writers so much!
Hi Beth:
I agree. Last time I met with my group, I literally brought a "concept." I think there's something there. But what? I have no idea.
E
Beth:
Whoops . . . pressed before I was done. My point was that I wasn't asking them to read it for word perfection but . . . can this become something. I was clear on that.
E
Hi Starbucks:
I am really firm about not inviting rewriting . . . UNLESS . . . it's a newbie who doesn't understand a show/tell or some concept, or some voice concept, or whatever. Then I might rewrite two paragraphs to demonstrate my point.
E
Critiquing is such a struggle for me. It's just that it's so different from teaching, and teaching is so ingrained in me.
For me, I slip into teacher mode, and I automatically ask, "What's the most important, biggest thing this needs to be better?" And then, after that, I might list the overall things, but I always fear diluting the most important thing, or overwhelming them so that they take away nothing. In fact, I have a difficult time giving a critique to someone whom I don't know; I don't know how they work or learn or hear or process things. It's like working blind, LOL. If we could have a critique a week for a few weeks, and gradually work through things, I'd be able to do it, LOL.
And sometimes I just don't see the point in looking at the little stuff or going line-by-line when big changes need to be made, because it's likely half those lines will be deleted or rewritten. (Well, actually, it's not likely they'll be deleted, LOL, as most people don't make huge changes, anyway.)
**hot button pressed** And this is precisely why I don't belong to a crit group any more. The trust wasn't there. And nit-picking my choice of words when I specifically asked for a big picture crit, just ticks me off.
Don't rewrite my stuff, just point out the stumbling blocks. I'll tweak my sentences when I fix the other stuff, thank you very much.
I did discover a WONDERFUL beta reader who pushes me to find the right words without telling me what those words are.
--does that even make sense??
Good CP's should help you grow as a writer, not force their style over your own.
Margaret
Erica, I agree with all your points. I recently critted an MS for a friend and had to keep stopping myself from rewriting an occasional phrase. The only times I ended up rewriting is when the explanation of what I was trying to say took three times as long as just showing what I meant. But I still gave the explanation so that the idea could (hopefully) be applied elsewhere.
Natasha:
If I really feel the whole chapter will change, then I don't nitpick either. On the other hand, if I point out lapses of language and nitpick for a bit, eventually, those lapses disappear from the person's writing and it's on to something else. So sometimes it serves a purpose.
E
Hi Magolla:
I am very fortunate to have developed a group I trust implicitly. Like a marriage or committed relationships . . . it takes work. Intuition. And I hear you. Nothing sets me off like being rewritten into someone ELSE'S voice.
E
Melanie:
I think I've always like talking about IDEAS more so I don't think I've ever fallen into that . . .
E
Thanks for this comprehensive listing! I'm beta reading now for someone. She's an awesome writer, but now I have to make sure I'm giving her what she needs.
Jon:
Scores of critical essays have been written about that book, and opinions vary as to exactly what is going on with that narrative. Most agree that it's a pretty damn good book, though.
And, you know, we use language for effect all the time. The trick is to remain invisible as you do it.
Hi Chris:
I'm sure you'll do great. :-)
E
Jude:
All novels are trickery. The language is for effect. But that was my point. In my original post, it's about spotting when the AUTHOR is visible when he or she isn't supposed to be.
It's like the Wizard of Oz. You don't want to see the man behind the curtain.
E
Erica:
I know, and that was a good catch on Jon's story today.
Sometimes it's largely a matter of opinion. There are those who call what James Lee Burke does with language "author intrusion," while others (including myself) tend to call it art.
It's very difficult to critique a piece. I used to try to critique my clients' work (scientific research articles), and the clients didn't respond to my questions. So I just began rewriting their prose. They thank me profusely because they don't want to think about what it takes to make the article better. They just want the article to be better. But this is probably different from writing fiction.
OK, so I'm days behind in the blog world. Story of my life.
With a critique partner I've found it helpful to ask what he or she is looking for before I begin.
One of the things I tend to tell CPs is when something doesn't make sense TO ME. I always make sure they know it's ME I'm talking about - and I'll ask "do you mean xyz? pdq? abc?" That has helped me be able to discern ambiguities in others writing and my own, to perhaps help the writer come out of his or her own head and look at their work like a reader. I think that might be something we all fall into, but maybe moreso for a beginner? Not sure.
Post a Comment