A Writer’s Journey

Jamie over at How Not To Write wrote an interesting article on Sunday about receiving a critique from an external service, and his view on the critique given was certainly enlightening.

It can be difficult at times to take criticism. To be told that something we have spent time, effort, sweat and maybe even blood on is flawed can be a hefty blow. The tendency in a critique, as displayed in Joanna Young’s post about feedback on her Confident Writing blog, is to be told all the things done correctly. All the positive points. Focus tends to lead away from the negative. As that is what’s expected, so too is it delivered.

But, Jamie expects something different:

To me, a successful critique does three things:

1. Tells me something I don’t know.
2. Hammers me with examples of my failures over and over again
3. Tells me something I know, but have tried desperately to ignore.

These three points got me thinking about what I expect from a critique and what is a suitable balance. And as a part of that balance, I’ll go through each of the three points made by Jamie.

Tells us something we don’t know: Often we already know all the good points of our work. Pride can make us blind to any errors we might see if we look with a purely objective eye.

Hammers out examples of failure over and over again: The same pride that makes us blind to mistakes also wants us to write a perfect piece. The only way to do that is to correct our mistakes, which we can’t do unless we know them.

Tells us something we know but have tried to ignore: We can probably apply this to both of the above. We know something is wrong, but for whatever reason we try and ignore it. Having it pointed out to us by someone else makes it more real so we can’t really ignore it. Allowing us to get as near to perfection as possible.

Of course, however, we need to consider that we write better when confident about our skills. So, how can we keep balance? We need to be told what is wrong with our writing so we can change/improve it, but we need to know what we are doing right so we keep doing it.

Perhaps the way to do it is to have two critiques: One focused solely on the positive, the other focused entirely on the ‘negative.’ That way, we can see clearly how we are performing.

What are your thoughts on this? What would you suggest? After all, without critiques how will we ever grow? They are paramount to developing as a writer.

Saladin Akara General Writing, Hints and Tips