Wading through the cross currents of constructive criticism

Been poking around Katrina’s blog, and her post about dealing with negative feedback, which reminded me of this great cartoon I received in an email newsletter years ago:

And while it doesn’t quite deal with book critics – or friends who critique your work – it does hit on some home truths: human beings aren’t naturals at dishing out constructive criticism. And we’re even less adept at taking it.

For my Now-Dead-Draft-Two, I had dished out the first 15 to 20 chapters to three people in my writing group, my dearest cousin, a friend from work, and a friend of a friend. And by far the least confusing advice I got were from the ones in the writing group, because they told me exactly

• which bits they liked
• which bits they thought needed work
• what techniques I could employ to fix said bits that needed work.

And immediately, that gave me a roadmap for improvement. Two out of three of them also smothered me with encouragement, which was just lovely and kind and timely. But they hardly know me, and yet they got straight to the point. And I walked away going, “Wow. I need to learn to critique like that.”

And then, there was the other kind of well-intentioned feedback that just left me confused as hell. And while I take full responsibility for junking Now-Dead-Draft-Two, I did it in part because I took EVERYONE’S suggestions on board and, well. Many cooks really can make a lousy clam chowder.

Know thyself, I conclude. I agree with Katrina – discernment is key. It’s not a free for all, and just because your critique partner doesn’t like how you haven’t painstakingly detailed your heroine’s every lump and bump, or what your hero smells like (“He smells like the man your man could smell like!”), doesn’t mean you have to do everything she says. Some feedback just stems from personal taste and opinion. And we can’t all like the same shoes. Because what’s the fun in that?