Generally speaking, I’m not big on podcasts (because I have a hard time focusing on and retaining audio-only information) but there is one that I make sure to tune into every week: Scriptnotes by screenwriters John August and Craig Mazin. John and Craig are funny, irreverent, and informative, and most of their insights apply to writing in general, not just writing for Hollywood.
A few episodes ago, they talked about “taking notes” – i.e., accepting feedback – and there were 2 points that really stuck out to me.
1. Deny, Defend, Debate
These are the normal human reactions to criticism. We reject what we don’t like; we justify what we do like; we argue about it all. These instincts are very human, yes – but they’re not all that helpful when it comes to improving our work (or ourselves).
For this reason, in many workshops, the author of a story being critiqued is not permitted to speak until after everyone else has shared their feedback. (Sometimes the author isn’t allowed to speak at all!) This forced silence keeps the deny-defend-debate monster waiting… and waiting… and waiting some more… so that by the time the writer finally gets a chance to open their mouth, that 3-D ogre may have given up and left altogether! At the very least, it should be lethargic or off-guard, allowing everyone’s feedback to slip by and reach the writer’s (hopefully open) mind.
Another technique I use to combat my own 3-D monster is to just say yes. No matter how much I hate a suggestion, or disagree with an edit, I force myself to accept it, to sit with it for a while, and then to reevaluate. After a few hours (or a few days), if it still doesn’t feel right, then I’m allowed to go back to what I had before. But more often than not, I find myself sticking with the changes my crit partners suggest.
All that being said, no matter how open-minded you try to be, sometimes feedback can be hard to swallow simply because of how it’s being delivered. Which leads me to…
2. “Goldilocks” Feedback
In other words, critiques are best (i.e., most helpful) when they’re not too broad, but not too specific either. And not too gentle, but not too harsh. Like Goldilocks, we writers need our feedback to be “just right” – somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, where it’s far more comfortable than either extreme.
Examples:
- “I don’t like this ending” = too broad.
- “I think the senator should tearfully confess, go through a series of grueling court appearances, and then be sentenced to 3 years in prison” = too specific.
- “I don’t find the resolution fully satisfying because the senator faces no consequences for her actions” = just right.
- “OMG I LOVE THIS YOU ARE THE BEST EVAR!” = too gentle.
- “Your prose is the most detestable garbage I’ve ever read” = too harsh.
- “Your metaphors work really well because they’re framed by the protagonist’s profession, but I think you can take out some of her daily work routine, which starts to get monotonous.” = just right.
Note that the “just right” examples incorporate the rationale behind the feedback – which allows a writer to understand the problem, making them more likely to accept the suggestion, or come up with their own solution.
I have two rules of thumb when I’m given the responsibility – and the privilege – of critiquing someone else’s work. First, I try to remember what type of feedback I find most helpful. Odds are, other writers will appreciate the same kinds of comments. And second, I always create what one of my professors liked to call a feedback sandwich. That means I start and end with the positives, and keep all the tough stuff in the middle. You’d be surprised how much “meat and veggies” a person can eat when they’re served between two delicious slices of “fresh bread.”
So that’s my advice on giving and getting feedback as a writer – and my recommendation for a good podcast. Bon apetit!
About Kristan Hoffman
Originally from Houston, TX, Kristan Hoffman studied creative writing at Carnegie Mellon University and later attended the Kenyon Review Writers Workshop. Now she lives with her family in Cincinnati, OH, where she writes both fiction and nonfiction with a focus on feminist, multicultural stories. Her words have appeared in the New York Times, Switchback, and the Citron Review, among others. She is currently at work on a Young Adult novel, and is represented by Tina Dubois of ICM. For more, please visit her website.
As if that wasn’t enough, there’s also the advice to consider the subtext behind the criticism.
“This character wouldn’t do that,” could translate into “you didn’t describe this character in a way that people could see he’d throw the kittens off the cliff.”
Excellent post! Everyone needs to read this.
Best advice I ever got my internal mantra for critiques: “Never defend or explain, if the read got it wrong, you need to rewrite it. You will not be there for explanations when your book is read.” I’ve gotten into the habit of responding with “Great catch, I’ll need to rework that bit.” And honestly, I’m being truthful by the time I say it, which is why keeping quiet is such a good idea.
wow sorry for all the typos… slept late, need coffee!
The good thing for me, regarding point #1, is that I need processing time, so when I DO get face-to-face style crits, I mostly nod and say, “Okay” or “Uh huh”, as that’s about all my brain is capable of. It’s easier for me to think it over, at leisure, and say, “Okay, BUT…” or “Maybe this would work better,” etc.
As for #2, it can be quite tough to walk the line between telling someone what you think they should do (i.e., “Rewrite this sentence like this:….”) vs. why you think they should do it. It’s simply easier sometimes to correct a sentence than to tell someone why you think it doesn’t work, but it’s generally much more valuable to do the latter.
I like the feedback sandwich idea. Try to be helpful while getting your point across.
Great post, Kristan.
I suppose WHO you chose as crit partner(s) is just as important. Finding the person or people that not only give their opinion in a professional manner, but they GET you as a writer, and you respect their point of view.
I find you’ll know them when you see them. Then hold on for dear life!
Denise Willson
Author of A Keeper’s Truth
Oh for sure! Like dating, finding a good crit partner can be tough. Definitely takes some trial and error. I got so lucky stumbling upon my group through a larger meet-up of writers. Once we realized how much we clicked together, we quietly splintered off from the others and have been like peas in a pod ever since.
The Goldilocks metaphor works for receiving as well as giving criticism: “They just don’t understand my story.” = too defensive. “Look at all this feedback–I should just give up!” = too defeatist. “Okay, maybe I need to look at this again.” = just right. :)
I’ve heard a rule (which I can’t relate exactly) that any time someone points to a problem in your writing, you should take it seriously and, there probably really is some kind of problem (but it may not be exactly how the person giving feedback describes it); however, you should rarely take other people’s suggestions as to how to “fix” your manuscript.
Besides critiquers not being vicious, I think this is a most important feedback rule. Just tell people what you don’t understand or what doesn’t work for you, whether because it’s implausible, boring, cliché or whatever. Avoid offering your “fixes” unless the author requests suggestions because it’s not your story and you don’t know where the story comes from. Let the author find their solutions (again, in some cases a writer may ask for suggestions, which is different.)
Great post, Kristan. I love the Goldilocks analogy.
I really like the idea of sitting silent through critique. I think in some ways it’s very helpful to get critique over email because you are forced to read all of it and sit with it before responding. Thanks for the post!
The sandwich idea is really helpful and I’m going to remember this strategy not just for writing but for life situations too. Thanks! I’m a editor/writer and I’ve learned to ask targeted questions to suggest changes or enlighten the writer about a weakness. From my own critics, I don’t always get the same consideration. I actually had an editor laugh at one of my sentences. Not so funny to me.
Your fresh bread analogy sounds delicious.
About the 3-D, she’s right, right, right. All the defenses come up at savage critique given for selfish reasons. (The defenses come up anyway, but these are the hardest to take.) But, some of it has been very valuable for me, once I got beyond the 3-D. They WERE right at that description was bad and that the first chapter had too much backstory.
I won’t knock the encouragers. I need them, too. But, I am learning to say to people. “If you don’t tell me where it’s slow, not good, etc., I can’t make the story better.”
When you have to keep your mouth shut during critiques, you’re pretty defenseless. So, to make it fair, critique-ers would do well to get it “just right.” Great reminder!
The sandwich is a great technique and much more helpful than just pointing out what’s not working. I also love it when people ask me questions about the character or the situation, i.e./”How does the room smell? What in Character’s past makes him react this way? How could you amp up the tension in this scene?” Asking questions immediately removes the defensiveness and makes me think about the critique in a different way.
And I definitely think that regardless of the skill of the critiquer, the most important thing is a good match.
The fastest way to stop what may be useful comments is to argue with the person who gives you feedback.
I’m with the ‘listen – and then decide what to do’ bunch.
And then don’t forget to thank anyone who takes part of their lifetime to give you anything.
(If you call it ‘feedback’ it doesn’t sting as much as ‘criticism.’ Even though one of the meanings of criticism is the same as feedback, it is a negative word.)
YES, it is SO important to show your appreciation for the time and thought someone else put into your work!
Great advice! A marriage counselor offered this exercise a number of years ago (Deny, Defend, Debate – being silent while the other one speaks) – and it was awesome! (Oh dear, but now I’m being too general/broad in my feedback.)
I am just about to head into a novel first chapter swap with some other writers. These tips will come in handy. Thank you. :-)
Yes, I do think these tips apply with all kinds of feedback, not just writing. :)
I’ve always been open to hearing suggestions. I’m not always open to sifting through people’s random comments and thoughts, but it comes with the territory unfortunately.
I don’t consider myself an experienced writer, so I only critique the feel of a story, dialogue, development of characters and how they relate to one another, and the pace.
I don’t believe in harsh critiques. (Your prose is the most detestable garbage I’ve ever read” = too harsh.) I would call that a random comment or thought from a harsh people.
I don’t believe in gentle critiques. I do believe compliments.
I don’t think it’s random; it’s just unhelpful. There’s a difference. Random would be more along the lines of, “Your font should be blue.” Uhhh, what? :P
But yes, compliments can be somewhat rare these days. People seem unsure of both how to give and how to receive them. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try, though!
or a harsh PERSON….
“I have two rules of thumb when I’m given the responsibility – and the privilege – of critiquing someone else’s work. ”
If I could highlight “privilege” I would. It truly is a privilege to be allowed to critique other people’s work, and I think, if others did the same, the providing the “just right” critique would be actually flow more naturally.
This was such an insightful post.
It’s amazing how many people don’t know how to critique a piece. Your post gives great guidelines, very similar to the writing group I’ve been with for four years.
The group leader set the boundaries, we have 3 minutes to talk about strengths and suggestions. Writer is silent until everyone is finished. The “deny, defend, debate,” ego crap diminishes.
It helps tremendously when the writer asks for specific help they’re looking for before the critique: pace, dialogue, setting. As with any suggestions, take what you want and leave the rest.
The process isn’t easy, but you’ll receive valuable insight into what the reader reads in your piece if you listen.
Yes, if a writer knows what areas they want to focus on ahead of time, it can definitely help to give readers that information.
(My only small caution is that sometimes we writers are blind to the real weak spots, so it’s important not to limit feedback TOO much… But I think more often than not, readers will speak out about something glaring, even if it’s not one of their pre-defined areas to look at.)
Speaking more specifically of screenplays, script writer Douglas Eboch just did a post on The Politics of Notes Sessions: http://letsschmooze.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-politics-of-notes-sessions.html
I found it an interesting look behind the scenes in Hollywood.
Very helpful way to look at critiques – and I’m mentally shifting the arena, considering how it could be applied to illustration critiques… Thanks!
Good post. If someone is giving thoughtful feedback, they deserve a thoughtful response, not a knee-jerk agree/disagree reply.
And, yes, for the “not-too-specific” feedback. I think over-specific feedback always amounts to “Don’t write it like you, write it the way I would write it.”
When you ask someone for directions, you don’t want them to try to grab the steering wheel. :-)
Lol so true!
The rule about staying silent is so helpful to me…my ultimate goal and the mantra I’ve been repeating for the last three years relating to receiving writing feedback is to “remain thoughtful, objective, gracious, and rational” about criticisms. This is easier said than done, but time is the key. If you can get yourself past the instinct of the 3-D’s, it’s much easier to evaluate whether the critique is valid, how to address it, and how to find the real cause of the reader’s dissatisfaction (which is not always what they say it is!)
The best response right to the critique partner, for me, is always, thank you so much for your thoughtful comments; this is going to be very helpful as I think through my revisions.
As well as calming the writer’s 3-D syndrome, silence creates space for the person giving the critique, which in turn enables her/his positive support to be made with genuineness. Everyone gets less defensive. I trace the skillful use of these things by the writers in my group to the trust that is growing. We are developing a taste for crow pie and are learning to laugh at our half-finished sentences, ideas, characters etc..
The internet relationship with my development editor came with silence and she beat the hell out of my manuscript where it fell short, but always bracketed her fire with clear statements of why getting the weaker things to match the strengths was imperative . .. and with encouragement that I could do it.
John McPhee’s recent articles on writing in the New Yorker show that, even for old pros, writing is humiliating while in process and glorious when polished.
I think the gist of the phrase Judith is trying to remember is, take advice on what needs fixing but generally ignore advice that tells you how to fix things. Was that a Stephen King quote?
Excellent post. I love the Goldilocks metaphor.