Peer Critique - Ilona Andrews

I?ve read an interesting blog post today.? In it, the author outlined her reasons for why she would and wouldn?t beta read someone?s manuscript. Her reasons are personal to her and this is one of those times where I have to tread carefully, as there is no one way of doing things.? So please don?t take this article as a criticism of her view, but rather as another way to approach peer critique.

Peer critique is a tricky thing.? Sometimes your peers react like this. Warning: video contains some profanity.

Nobody really wants to be on the receiving end of a freak out.? In a workshop environment, you learn to watch out for people who can?t handle criticism.? So I won?t elaborate on all of the reasons why one may choose not to critique.? Instead, I?d like to offer you some reasons why you should.

Here are Dahlia?s criteria:

• Because I?ve read for you before, and you appreciate it, and you discuss my notes with me or at least act like you?re putting thought into implementing them.
• Because even though I haven?t read for you before, I know from however I know you that you are a decent person who will appreciate it and thank me for it, and think I can probably do a good job.
• Because you have beta?d mine, which I wholeheartedly appreciate. Or you?ve offered to beta mine, genuinely enough that I just might take you up on it someday.
• Because I?m the last round and you?re looking for a very, very light beta read. And I am trusting you, even though I?ve been lied to about this in the past. (See #5.)

As I?ve said, this is one way of looking at things.? This set of criteria focuses a lot on the validation of reviewer and reciprocity, which is understandable, because some people do tend to take an unfair advantage of a workshop situation.

As an aspiring writer, my mindset was radically different.? I?m very target-focused. See target, proceed to destination by any means necessary. Destination for me was publication and getting there meant getting better so I did whatever I had to do to get better.? Nothing else mattered.? I figured out early on that workshop environment would be emotionally difficult but would get me there the fastest, so I critiqued probably upward of a thousand or so of chapters and short stories during my three years at sff.onlinewritingworkshop.

Here are my criteria for choosing to read someone?s manuscript, in order of importance.

1)? Can I learn from the author?

Successful writers don?t just read, we learn.? We learn from our peers? successes and from their mistakes. Nothing teaches you faster than being forced to critically evaluate another person?s manuscript. It?s not about just pointing out that something doesn?t work, it?s about why it didn?t work and applying it to your own writing. ? This is it, right there, the primary and most important reason to critique.? The manuscript itself could be atrocious, but if I can see that the author does something right, I want to learn from it. If the author does something poorly, I want to learn from it too.? Okay, she has a flashback within a flashback ? note to self, do not do this, it?s confusing.? But her descriptions of action scenes are awesome.? Why?? What is she doing right? How can I use this?

But this is all about you and not the person you?re critiquing.? Yep. The person I?m critiquing may be my friend and I might care deeply about her success as a writer, but I want to succeed too.? I want to make it, so yes, it is all about me.? Alternatively, the person I am critiquing could be a complete ass, but if he has a brilliant manuscript, I don?t care.? Gimme.? I want to know what he is doing right and how he?s doing it.

2) Can I learn from this author?s critique, if they reciprocate?

Every writer has their strengths and weaknesses. I?ve ran across other writers in the workshop environment who could write circles around me, and I knew that my technical critique wasn?t that useful to them. I would concentrate on offering reader reactions, because those are always helpful, and hope they drove by my latest chapter and pointed out my blind spots.? I would go and critique Charlie Finlay?s work, because he was miles better than me, and keep my fingers crossed he would stop by and offer some feedback, because I wanted to know how his brain worked.

3) Will the person be abusive if I critique them?

This is a distant third. Creative assholes are a special breed of assholes, so sometimes you have to decide if the benefit of learning outweighs the torrent of vitriol you will get back.

4) Will I get to see the second draft?

An even more distant fourth. I never expect that any of my suggestions will be implemented.? Once I finished the critique, my part in this process is done. The writer of the manuscript owes me nothing except a thank you and possibly a reciprocal critique if this was prearranged.

Even that second one should become less and less of an issue.? If people don?t want to critique my manuscript, if they don?t feel compelled to ask me for it, then as a writer, I?m failing.? Why isn?t my manuscript engaging enough?? Why isn?t it fun enough?? The goal is to get to the stage where you offer your work for feedback and people jump on it.? But in the beginning, I was writing crap.? If someone reciprocated, I felt privileged.

The author doesn?t owe me the implementation of my suggestions.? They have their vision and I have mine.? In the end, it is their manuscript, their work, their words. If my critique wasn?t useful, so be it.? Take what you can use, ignore the rest.? No hurt feelings.? Feelings don?t even come into this equation unless they are on the page.

I?ve previously received a critique from a published author.? I was unpublished and she had won awards.? I had read her critique like it came down from Mount Sinai, analyzed it, took a deep breath and chose to ignore it, because it didn?t fit my vision of the narrative.? And later, when I blogged about it, she came by and said, ?Good for you!? On the flip side, I?ve received beta feedback from someone on Magic Rises a month ago and I?ve implemented 95% of it.

When Magic Bites was about to be published, our editor asked us to cut the manuscript for length by about a quarter.? She suggested that we should take out the front and end frame and the entire Olathe subplot.? The scene with vampires on the ceiling would be gone.? Her rationale was perfectly sound.? It would be easy to cut it and it would eliminate a huge number of words with a minimum fuss.? But the entire series arc hinged on that scene.? Our editor didn?t know this at the time.? We didn?t even know there would be a series, but we were hoping.? So, being green, I scraped enough courage together and asked if we could cut somewhere else.? The answer stunned me.? She said, ?Of course.? I?m just pointing out the problem and one possible solution.?

Critique points out problems.? It is up to the author to validate these problems and try to find the best possible solution for them.

But, if I offer critique, I do like to see the second draft.? I want to know how the problems were addressed, if they were addressed, so I can learn from it.

Since writing became a career, unfortunately there is a new criteria that overrides everything: do I have time? Usually I don?t, unless you?re a friend whose work I love, in which case I will make time.

So there you go.? An alternative point of view for the day.? How you critique and why ultimately hinges on what you want to get out of it.

Standard disclaimer: Don?t take what I write as gospel. There are many roads to publication and success as a writer and many definition of that success.? Mine is not the only way to go, nor is it the best way ? you have to find your own.? This is simply how I did it and your mileage will vary.

Source: http://www.ilona-andrews.com/writing/peer-critique

Sam Champion Hulk Hogan sex tape orioles Sarah Jones chicago marathon Johnny Depp Dead college football rankings