Critiquing Guidelines

Critiquing for the Wordsmiths as presented by Caitlin Henderson

For the Critic:

Before you do anything, make sure you understand fully what the writer is trying to achieve. This includes: • The format. Is this an excerpt from novel, a poem, short story, etc? Mistaking a chapter from a novel for a short story won't result in a helpful critique. • The writer's intention for the work. Something intended for submission to a publishing house has different requirements than something intended for a local paper, or a blog. Familiarise yourself with the differences. • The writer's intended target audience. • The writer's intended tone. • The writer's intended genre. • What the writer wants from you as a critic. If the writer has asked specific questions, focus on these. Your job is to help the writer where they ask for it, though in most cases they will leave everything on the table for discussion.

It's ok to ask questions before you start. Once you understand these basic elements of the work, you can begin writing your critique.

Never base your points on what you liked and didn't like. Critiques will always be subjective – but try to focus on whether or not the writer is achieving their vision for the piece, and where it is working or not working. Remove your personal preferences from the equation and ask yourself in each case: Is this achieving what the writer wants to achieve? If so, why or why not?

Start and end with the positives – especially if the writer is new to the process. This doesn't mean you have to tell the writer you loved their piece – you will be critiquing many genres that may not be “your thing”. Pick out areas of the piece that were effective and achieved what they set out to achieve. Point them out to the writer. These can be as helpful as negative points, because the writer can see where they are on the right track and what is working well for them.

Once you have identified a few areas where the piece is working, it's time to focus on the problem areas. It's important at this time to pick your battles. Writers new to the critique process may have many obvious areas that need improvement, but it is important not to overwhelm them. Start with some basic concepts and don't narrow your focus too much on particulars. Writers more experienced with the process will benefit from focussed critiques that point out specific areas that need work. They can deal with more complex concepts and react with more maturity to critique. Once you work with a writer a few times, you will learn how to communicate without disheartening or confusing one another.

The body of your critique should deal with the questions we posed at the beginning. Have a look at the:  Format / Intention for publishing / Target audience / Tone / Genre Is your experience reading the work matching the writer's intentions? Is the children's story sounding more like an adult novel? Does the tone start off dark and then turn humorous? Does the story set up as a sci-fi thriller and suddenly become a romance? Help guide the writer back on track, or discuss whether they may need to redefine their concept.

At Wordsmiths, we deal mostly with narrative fiction. This format has its own important areas to consider when providing critique. Here are a few areas you may wish to comment on: ◦

Plot covers all the events of the story. The plot must hold the reader's attention, make sense and, above all, arise from the characters. What does that mean? ...

Characters are the origin for all the events of the narrative. The plot exists to reveal character and test their weak points. A good critique comments on these two elements in relation to one another, and ensures they are working together at all times.

Protagonist (main character). If this character is standing around watching the action unfold around them but not causing it, they are too passive. If they are an all-star action hero with no flaws, they are too unrealistic.

Dialogue is a difficult area for many new writers (and experienced ones too!) Often what sounds realistic to one person may not to another. Read the dialogue aloud and consider the world in which the narrative is set and the background of the characters before commenting. Characters should all have their own identifiable way of speaking.

Setting and description go hand in hand. Some writers put too much emphasis on their setting and go overboard with description, which can bog down and slow the action. On the other hand, “floating scenes” are those in which the writer has neglected to provide enough description to allow us to visualise the scene in the same way as them, which leads to confusion.

Voice is the style in which the narrative is written. It may be different to the individual voices of the characters, and should suit the genre of the piece. If all the characters sound like the writer, or the military action-thriller is written in Tolkeinesque prose, consider commenting on the voice.  Pace is very important and needs to be viewed both up close and from a distance in longer pieces. Pace can vary, but must maintain overall momentum and ramp up as the story progresses, or the reader will become bored. Conversely, something that moves too quickly may confuse and lose the reader.

Structure can only be commented on when viewing the piece as a whole. It refers to the arrangement of the plot and any twists, or “turning points” in the narrative. If the majority of the narrative is spent setting up the characters and setting, and all the action happens in the last few pages, there is a structural problem with the story. If it jumps straight to the action and we don't meet the characters, this could also be considered a structural problem.

Don't get too hung up on obvious typos and spelling mistakes. You may choose to highlight these on a second document, but it's not worth discussing unless the writer is making an extraordinarily amount of them. What is worth discussing, is a repeated grammatical error, as the writer may need the correct usage pointed out to them. Work with the writer over several critiques to improve grammatical errors – don't expect them to be fixed all at once.

If you identify a problem in the writer's piece, you may make a suggestion about how they might go about fixing it. This is a step in a positive direction and doesn't leave the writer with a whole bunch of gaping holes in their piece that they can't deal with. However, don't tell them how to fix it, or make suggestions based on your personal preferences (“I'd like the story more if this happened instead”) - because that's not your job.

Presenting Your Critique

At Wordsmiths, you are required to orally present your critique to the writer in front of the

group, then provide the writer with the written version. As such, it is important to have clear and concise notes that can be understood by both you and the writer at a glance. Typed notes are both easier to read and display that preparation and thought has gone into the critique.

Above all, remember: Be polite and considerate. Don't lather the writer in false praise, but don't neglect to tell them what they did well. Leave yourself and your preferences out of the critique. Don't overwhelm them. Make every comment helpful.

For the Writer

Learning how to react to critiques can be harder than critiquing itself. Much time and effort goes into crafting a piece of writing – not to mention the emotional investment. Being told that your piece is not Perfect in All Ways can be hard to accept at first, but with practice you can work with the critic – not against them – to make the most of a good critique. Here are some important things to remember:

➢ Don't take it personally! It is your work being critiqued – not you. Writing is something that can always be improved, and finding out ways to improve yours doesn't make you worthless – it makes you proactive and already ahead of all the other writers who won't offer their work up for feedback!

➢ Do not speak while the critique is being offered, unless the critic asks you a question. It is tempting to rebut points or explain why you think there's no problems, but that's not going to help you improve your piece. Let the critique happen, because if someone thought something was a problem, it's definitely worth hearing.

➢ In that same vein, don't get into an argument. You don't need to agree with everything the critic says, but you also don't need to argue about it. Both your opinions are as valid as each other. It's up to you to decide (later) what to do with those opinions.

➢ Take your own notes. Don't rely on the set you will receive to explain everything to you perfectly, or to encompass every discussion that might arise during the critique. Make sure you understand the problems with your piece and make a note about how you might go about fixing them. Two sets of perspectives are better than one when it comes to acting on the critique.

➢ You don't need to act on every piece of criticism. Similarly, you shouldn't dismiss a comment because it differs from your perspective. Pay particular heed to the same comment coming from multiple sources, but don't discount that single people may have important insights into your work that are worth considering. In the end, it is up to you what you do with your critiques, but make sure you don't waste them. If you are having trouble deciding what to do, apply the same logic as you would when critiquing someone else's work: Does it work for your piece, or is it a personal preference that should be discounted?

➢ Say thank you, and mean it! Receiving a critique is a blessing – it is volunteered time and expertise for your benefit.

➢ And stay positive. No matter how many problems there are with your piece, you are now one step closer to becoming a better writer. Embrace the learning process and leave your pride where it belongs – at home, under the bed, as far away from your manuscript as possible