In which I might need ettiquette lessons

[ultranos]

So, for this sci-fi writing class I'm taking, we write short stories and then every week, two people send out their stories to the class, and the following week we come back and workshop them. Workshopping here means sitting around a table and having everyone say what they liked and didn't like about your story in 2 minutes or less. Authors are not allowed to defend themselves until the end. Also, everyone critiquing gives the author a written half-page to one-page critique.

It's basically beta-ing, only times 10 and with bonus social awkwardness! Or something.

Anyway, I have a question for the ol' flist: in this sort of situation, would you prefer a critique that sort-of sugar-coated things while possibly dancing around problem areas, or one that was brutally honest but didn't care so much for actually voicing these things in public?

Because there's a world of difference between one-on-one critique in private, and a roundtable critique, and I can see how it might be more socially acceptable to sugar-coat things a little more.

For the record, I fear I fall into the "brutally honest" category. I've also seem to have developed a reputation in this class for having an exceedingly sharp tongue. (Basically, whenever the instructor reads selections from our weekly written responses to professional short stories and reads something snarky, EVERYONE at the table now turns to look at me.)

So, yeah, I'm wondering how much do I have to watch my mouth when I call people out on Things That Bug Me about their stories. "I'm not TRYING to be a bastard, I honestly want everyone to write really, really good stories!"

Comments

[shutthef-up.livejournal.com]

I'd try to coat criticism with a little sugar. At least until you get a feel for how people are going to react. Especially since you already have a reputation for a sharp tongue. Everyone's threshold is different for it and a roundtable can be pretty intimidating in itself.

Take care and I hope this helps!

[ultranos-fic.livejournal.com]

It does help. I'll probably be nicer (okay, I will be nicer) in the actual roundtable, but I'm wondering if I shouldn't rewrite the private written critique as well.

[havocthecat]

Hrm. Despite my comment below, yes, I would agree that, if you're betareading for someone for the first time, it's best to point things out tactfully. Otherwise a beta can be accused of being a mean bitch and killing inspiration, and the drama from that (and the associated hordes of e-mails where your writer is questioning his or her writing ability) is TIRING.

I did a verbal beta for my BFF, whom I've known for 12 years now, and I still had to tell her multiple times that I. Don't. Hate. Her. Fic. (She has issues, unrelated to me, which I inadvertently triggered. OMG.)

[beanpot.livejournal.com]

I'd figure out how to say it constructively because I know I tend to ignore "brutally honest" criticism. Primarily because if the person giving it doesn't seem to care about how I will react, then I can't be bothered to listen them.

I'd start out with what you like about a piece followed by what you don't like, framed in a way that makes it sound like your pieces of advice will help.

[ultranos-fic.livejournal.com]

*nods* Right. I just finished writing out the written critique for one story and just really wondered if I was being too harsh. I did start off with what I liked and that I really did think the story had potential. And that I was nitpicking and pointing out glaring things because I thought it'd be a shame to waste the potential. And also to ignore me if what I was saying was totally out-of-line with what the author was trying to accomplish.

[aurora-novarum.livejournal.com]

Yeah, if you've already got that reputation, hmm.

I'd not necessarily sugar coat the flaws, but highlight a spot you liked and when it's your turn at roundtable, expand on that. "You used great symbolism here. Did you think of making it a recurring theme in the fic?"

Be more expansive in the written analysis but be sure to include your highlight reel notes along with the (are you really sure you want to put THAT there?!)

[ultranos-fic.livejournal.com]

Well, the reputation is really for the professional stories we have to read every week. I feel no obligation to mince words on that one, and, well, it generally makes everyone burst out laughing. For the actual critiques, I'm much nicer.

I do always try to find what I do like about a story and highlight it first.

So, do you suggest leaving the written critique much like how it is, and being nicer in the roundtable? (The latter is which I would agree with.)

[abyssinia4077.livejournal.com]

I've had several classes over the last few semesters that require us to peer review papers and I've been beta-ing for so long that I tend to, well, leave a heck of a lot more comments than the reviews I get back from people. Sometimes I worry that I'm being mean or nitpicky or just more than the person was expecting, but I've consistently had people thank me for being so thorough.

I think it's good in this kind of situation to point out things you liked as well as things you didn't and to offer constructive criticism (instead of "this phrasing sucks" say "this phrasing is a bit awkward, have you tried something like...."). I'd also be a little more gentle verbally in the roundtable and save the harsher stuff for the written criticism. It's easier to take criticism while reading it privately than it is while said to you in front of a group.

(that said, at least in the written stuff, I'd definitely prefer brutal honesty, just like you. I'm sure you're shocked)

[ultranos-fic.livejournal.com]

*nod* I asked a friend who's also taking the class if I could nitpick, and she told me she really wanted me to. So I did, and she told me she appreciated it. So I don't know.

Yeah, and I agree with the gentler verbal critique and harsher in the written.

[abyssinia4077.livejournal.com]

The way I see it is that a reviewer/beta/whatever isn't grading me or judging me - they are adding their perspective and knowledge and experience to help me make my story better, and I WANT my story to be better. Getting mad at them after they took the time to help me, or wanting them to hold back and not help as much as they can, is just stupid and a waste of everyone's time. They don't make comments to be mean, they make them to *help* and, yes, some comments are easier to take than others depending on wording, but all of them are useful if the reviewer is doing his/her job.

[holdouttrout.livejournal.com]

I think that being harsh is more about how you say it, and less about what you say. I definitely agree with the nicer in the rountable and more critical in the written approach, and personally, I wish people HAD been harsher in my critique groups, since it might have made me a better writer (after the intial soul-crushing depression phase). *g*

[ultranos-fic.livejournal.com]

*nod* That makes sense. And yeah, it's easier to be nicer at the roundtable, actually, because it's easier to be harsher when you're not staring someone in the face.

I honestly don't enjoy crushing people's souls!

[havocthecat]

Brutal honesty FTW. Because otherwise, how can I possibly improve as a writer, y'know?

[ultranos-fic.livejournal.com]

That's my logic. But what works for me possibly won't work for everyone else.

Me, I'm HOPING my story gets ripped apart, um, next week I think. I really don't want lots of "omg so wonderful" comments, because I know it has problems, and I can't fix them if I don't know WHERE they are.

I just want it to be constructive criticism and, well, not vitriol of the "...did you even READ the story?" kind. Which is also why I'm kinda worried about playing nice and not destroying people's souls. :)

[havocthecat]

Well, yeah. I did clarify more in one of the other threads. :)

What I really hate is sending fic off and getting a "looks great!" in return. Seriously, there's not NOTHING wrong with my fic, trust me. So I feel your pain there.

[annienau08.livejournal.com]

I actually took this exact class - minus the sci-fi part. But the 2 a week, roundtable discussion plus written feedback bits were exactly the same. So having been on both sides of the fence, I'd say definitely be honest but ease off on the brutal. At least in the round table. I know it was easier for me to accept some of the harsher criticisms to my stories when they were written out than talked about in class. I didn't feel like I was under a microscope and I was able to get go of my defensiveness enough to absorb the critiques for what they were.

That being said, I appreciate people who were blunt about what they didn't like more than the ones trying to blow sunshine up my ass about my story. Telling me only the things they liked was supremely unhelpful.

[ultranos-fic.livejournal.com]

Huh. Now I wonder if a lot of writing classes are structured this way. :)

And yeah, like I said, I generally do try to be nicer during the roundtable and ease off on the snark and harshness (unless they're good friends who I know can take it in the way its intended, i.e. criticism with humor).

But I know I personally do get more out of people bluntly telling me what didn't work. I always generally try to find one thing I liked and one thing that needed work, at least. Some end up having more on one end than the other, but getting a critique of only what I liked or what I didn't like are both bad in different ways.