What is Constructive Criticism?

[NOIRTRASH]

Minutes ago I read James Lee Burke comments about Charles Willeford. Burke accused Willeford of writing wonderful constructive criticism, but didn't define what constructive criticism is. I suspect it always means PLEASE KISS MY ASS.

How do YOU know when you get constructive criticism? Details please.

 

[GoldenCojones]

IMHO, constructive criticism is polite, well formed, informational criticism intended to help the author see where they can improve.

"Please kiss my ass" is not constructive because it is neither informational nor intended to help the author.


"Hey muther-fucker, you spelled disease wrong! You must be the stupidest shithole to ever live." is not constructive criticism because it isn't polite. It may have been intended to help, but the tone prevents that.

"While your writing is descriptive enough to be fun to read, the frequent mis-spellings, such as the word 'disease', kept me from enjoying the story. You really should run your story through a spell checker and then also re-read it to reduce the number of errors," is constructive criticism. It meets all my criteria. It is polite, well formed, informative, and intended to help the author.

 

[TxRad]

IMHO, constructive criticism is polite, well formed, informational criticism intended to help the author see where they can improve.

"Please kiss my ass" is not constructive because it is neither informational nor intended to help the author.


"Hey muther-fucker, you spelled disease wrong! You must be the stupidest shithole to ever live." is not constructive criticism because it isn't polite. It may have been intended to help, but the tone prevents that.

"While your writing is descriptive enough to be fun to read, the frequent mis-spellings, such as the word 'disease', kept me from enjoying the story. You really should run your story through a spell checker and then also re-read it to reduce the number of errors," is constructive criticism. It meets all my criteria. It is polite, well formed, informative, and intended to help the author.

That about covers it.

 

[Carnevil9]

I once received some very constructive criticism. It was along the lines of, "Nice story, but please remember that an ass can be taut, but not taught."

I never made that mistake again. Nor have I failed to notice when others made it.

 

[GoldenCojones]

I once received some very constructive criticism. It was along the lines of, "Nice story, but please remember that an ass can be taut, but not taught."

I never made that mistake again. Nor have I failed to notice when others made it.

My dad's belt taught my ass plenty

 

[TxRad]

My dad's belt taught my ass plenty

The blacks and blue lessons were the mild ones. When you got those subtle shades of purple, those were the important ones.

 

[Carnevil9]

My dad's belt taught my ass plenty

Good point. If I ever write a BDSM story, I'll try to work in the pun.

 

[legerdemer]

...

How do YOU know when you get constructive criticism? Details please.

Constructive criticism DOESN'T kiss ass. I think comments fall into the constructive category when they say BOTH WHY they liked and disliked various parts of the story s/he read. That gives me a concrete feeling for what worked and what didn't. There's also a feeling you get as a writer when a reader offers thoughtful suggestions (I want more is not, or barely, in that category) in literate language. You know when someone spent more than 30 seconds on their comment. If they have an idea for how to improve what they disliked, that's welcome, though I may disagree. Even if I don't take the suggestion, any comment that makes me think about the story in a different light, helps me step back from it and view it from someone else's POV, is a constructive comment in my book.

One reader in particular (who I wish were still around but I don't think is; he was neither acquaintance or friend, and disappeared into the ether subsequently) sent me feedback for which I thanked him. He then sent me such an in-depth analysis of the same story that I took much of his advice, edited the story, and thanked him for his editorial input on the edited version.

I have since had several folks who have read or edited my story who've given me these types of comments. I always appreciate their time and thoughtfulness.

The FAWCs that were started by SlycWillie and continued once in his honor by Lynn were great for their criticism of stories that were first posted anonymously, then critiqued (in principle no one knew who wrote what, and it sometimes worked, especially when the authors were new and not known to everyone by their styles, or when experienced authors stepped out of their box). Many of the authors here give very good constructive criticism, when it's not fawning and when they take the time to do it.

I am horrible at finding the private time for high quality criticism. I also don't want to feel as if I need to kiss anyone's ass in my comments. I'd rather not comment than put a comment in that I think will be taken the wrong way and seriously ruffle someone's feathers. So I generally don't comment.

 

[sr71plt]

You wouldn't know constructive criticism, JBJ, if it bit you on your KKK robe.

 

[sr71plt]

For starters, I think that constructive criticism is that which is sought by the author. I question the motives--and the training to be a constructive critic--of any unsolicited vigilante critique.

 

[Areala-chan]

For starters, I think that constructive criticism is that which is sought by the author. I question the motives--and the training to be a constructive critic--of any unsolicited vigilante critique.

Genuine question here, not trying to be sarcastic or pot-stirring.

I love comments on my work, positive or negative, but I don't usually post a "tell me what you thought" bit at the end to encourage critique. Directors don't put messages in the credits telling their audience to log into Facebook and start a conversation, after all. But if one is moved to explain what they liked or did not like about a story when unsolicited, is this genuinely a bad thing? In my mind it means they were moved in some way. Most of us here aren't pros, and I certainly never offer my comments as though I get paid to do this, but I'll respect anybody willing to put their own opinion out there to help me see a bigger picture.

My assumption is that most of the writers here share a similar mindset. Is this actually the case?

 

[lovecraft68]

Constructive criticism is a rarity here. Its mostly Loved it, hated it mixed in with vitriolic spew from bitter men whose mind is the only thing smaller than their dick.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

LAUREL please make the following emoticon: A full yellow moon with a heart on it. To use for ass-kissing stories.

 

[sr71plt]

Genuine question here, not trying to be sarcastic or pot-stirring.

I love comments on my work, positive or negative, but I don't usually post a "tell me what you thought" bit at the end to encourage critique. Directors don't put messages in the credits telling their audience to log into Facebook and start a conversation, after all. But if one is moved to explain what they liked or did not like about a story when unsolicited, is this genuinely a bad thing? In my mind it means they were moved in some way. Most of us here aren't pros, and I certainly never offer my comments as though I get paid to do this, but I'll respect anybody willing to put their own opinion out there to help me see a bigger picture.

My assumption is that most of the writers here share a similar mindset. Is this actually the case?

A critique isn't saying what you like or don't about the story--that's a personal preference issue, and is free game, I think. A critique is bringing some sort of writing standard to bear on the work. It's getting into what is right and wrong in story construction. I don't believe in going there unless asked to (not least because that's when someone is receptive to receiving help--and also because it's legitimate at Lit. to post stories just for the fun and release of them, not as any sort of developmental process). And, especially since Lit. doesn't have a way of vetting anyone's expertise in writing, I don't pay attention to unsolicited criticism--unless it points to a goof I recognize as a goof (which happens from time to time). Even there, when it points to one misspelling or typo in a 5,000-word story I've spent time, effort, and my own trained expertise to write, I just toss it out as anal pettiness. There's no such thing as "prefect" copy.

So, I think two aspects are being jammed together here that shouldn't be. "I liked" is in a different realm from "you went for three pages without identifying which of three characters was saying what." The former isn't critique, constructive or otherwise. The latter is, but when it's give without being solicited, I question whether or not it's mostly a claim to superiority--and in a good many cases I see it in operation at Lit., the one giving the critique doesn't know half as much about writing as he/she thinks they do.

 

[lovecraft68]

LAUREL please make the following emoticon: A full yellow moon with a heart on it. To use for ass-kissing stories.

Laurel....please change JB's AV so the gun is facing him.

 

[holliday1960]

That about covers it.

Agreed. I think a personal "I like" can, and often does, contain a useful critique. I got one like that just the other day, and it brought to my attention some things I hadn't realized previously. It seems I spend way too much time describing the scene rather than appealing to the reader's compassion, or lack thereof, to the characters themselves.
Everyone keeps saying, "Don't worry about numbers!" But, when people don't bother to comment, which most don't, the numbers are the only indication of how well most of the readers understood and enjoyed the story. So for me, numbers do matter. After viewing them, then I just have to brainstorm to figure out what I could do to make the story more enjoyable.
Comments and critiques would be easier and more useful, but lacking those, I go by the numbers.

 

[oggbashan]

Constructive criticism?

I've had a few examples:

'You changed the name of the heroine in the last few paragraphs'

'DVDs didn't exist in the 1960s'

'She didn't walk into the bedroom dressed in her bathroom'

'Why are they driving to Hampshire if they're going to Tunbridge Wells?'

But I've also had similar statements that criticised things for being incorrect when I know what I wrote was accurate:

"The term 'pussy' didn't exist in the 1960s and neither were vajs shaved' -

In the UK the term pussy is centuries old, and shaved areas came with miniskirts (and before that as part of treatments for pubic lice. Yeuck!). Meeting bare private parts was initially a cause for concern until it became more common. And I met them in the early 1960s.

 

[NicoleZ]

You wouldn't know constructive criticism, JBJ, if it bit you on your KKK robe.

That's an intriguing start, do you think we can expect a Pilot episode anytime soon?

Or maybe that was it?

 

[NOIRTRASH]

That's an intriguing start, do you think we can expect a Pilot episode anytime soon?

Or maybe that was it?

PILOT is exiled to my shit list from where no mortal returns. And he knows my enduring sentiments for the KKK. If he publicly pleads for my attention I may relent and piss on him, but only because my heart is big.

 

[sr71plt]

That's an intriguing start, do you think we can expect a Pilot episode anytime soon?

Or maybe that was it?

No. I've read little of his, but enough to know that he technically is a good writer but I have no interest in what he writes. Not being interested in what he writes isn't criticism, constructive or otherwise. That I think he's technically a good writer obviates any need to give him critique--and he hasn't asked me for any. I do note that I don't find what he writes remotely erotic and that this is an erotica site, but them's just facts.

That's a reason for me just not to read his stories--and certainly not to vote or comment on his stories. I don't tell anyone else not to read or comment on his stories, as they like. It's a huge site with a wide variety of interests. Everything doesn't have to fall into my interest zone. On the forum, though, it's also reason enough for me to note that I don't think he has a clue about writing erotica when he's criticizing the writing here of others (usually with a sour blanket "it's all crap" one liner). He's a novice writer and is still in the phase of bouncing from the advice and writing of one published writer to the other and just regurgitating what they have to say (and most of them are only writing about writing to get a paycheck. It has little to do with what they actually write).

 

[SCM_AUTHOR]

Constructive criticism doesn't have to be flowery, a blunt "didn't like x because y" is fine. As long as there's a valid reason be it not descriptive enough or too descriptive etc, it gives you something to work with. If it's just because its outside the reader preference then you can give that a damn good ignoring.

If you have the time and motivation to write a detailed critique, I think the shit sandwich works best. This worked, this didn't but overall thumbs up, keep writing.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

I wanna know what constructive criticism is, so far what I got are nominalizations without skin and bones. Nominalizations are like farts and woman's love.

 

[NicoleZ]

I wanna know what constructive criticism is, so far what I got are nominalizations without skin and bones. Nominalizations are like farts and woman's love.

It used to be known as critique (a.k.a. criticism) but people tended and still tend to overlook and disregard the positive parts of it and instead focused on the negative aspects (eg. "This is where the story loses cohesion because of...) to the extent that the semantic content of the word itself changed and became a near-synonym of "slagging off"*, therefore a new and more neutral term was invented - constructive criticism.


*The jealously motivated derision of the talented by mean-spirited minnows of negligible ability with little or no creative talent themselves, intent only on self-aggrandisement, wishing to disguise their thinly-veiled attacks as honest-injun "objective critique", played no small role in this.

 

[ishtat]

For starters, I think that constructive criticism is that which is sought by the author. I question the motives--and the training to be a constructive critic--of any unsolicited vigilante critique.

I don't agree that constructive criticism should necessarily be sought by the author, but concede that most criticism here is both unsolicited and useless. The best criticism should pass an effectiveness test of attempting to improve the writing, and that would exclude 99.9% of comments on stories.

Two constructive critics here spring to my mind, the first was a completely untrained woman who had an consistent ability of homing in on the most important weakness in a submission. She generally only made that one point with a 'whaddya think' courtesy and style. It worked.

The second, also a woman is a qualified expert, with many years experience as an editor at major publishing houses. Her analytical criticisms are always delivered with great courtesy and can be very helpful. Few authors react negatively to her comment, but some do - she never seems to get rattled, the dialogue just ends.

This type of critic is very rare here, but generally I think we should put up with the great majority of rubbish to allow the occasional gems to emerge.

I don't think that all unsolicited criticism can be labelled vigilante, but if a particular piece can, then it can be summarily dismissed.

 

[NicoleZ]

I... ...concede that most criticism here is both unsolicited and useless. The best criticism should pass an effectiveness test of attempting to improve the writing, and that would exclude 99.9% of comments on stories.

To many, criticism is never considered to be constructive unless it stokes the ego of the person criticised, thus they will never listen to critique no matter how well-intentioned it is.