I've been through many workshops and critiques that were done in person and online. The one problem that comes up time and again for critiquers is figuring out how to write a critique that actually helps the author. There are a variety of guidelines out there on how to write a good critique and I've read many of them – some of them came from my college professors, some from online workshops, and others from various writing groups.

Looking back with several years of critiquing experience under my belt, I finally realized that none of these guidelines actually say what they mean. Often times they are too general, too harsh, or too wishy-washy. These guides don't help you know how to be diplomatic, truthful, and helpful with your comments. As a result, writers end up receiving critiques that are vague, take the story in a completely different direction, or are so harsh that they destroy what little confidence a new author has mustered.

Who wants that in a critique? Not me. And probably not you either. So, I put together a list of topics we should consider before hitting the send button on a crit.


1. It's the Author's Prerogative to Toss Your Critique
Just because you took painstaking efforts to write what you believe is a spot-on critique of an author's work doesn't mean it'll be used. It's not personal. When writing a story, authors have a very specific image in mind that they are trying to evoke through prose: a nihilist view of life that makes the reader question the value of living, the effects on the world around an imploding character, a story that evokes change within the reader rather than the main character, and so on and so forth. Therefore, if the critique you provide doesn’t help the author meet her goal, she is not going to use your critique.

This is not to say that the entire crit will be tossed. She may take all, some, or none of your critique when going through the revision process in order to maintain the integrity of the story, which needs to come before the ego of either the author or the critiquer. This is a hard line to draw, but it can be done and no one should feel slighted if his or her opinions are not found useful or helpful to the author. The best way to avoid writing a useless critique is to make sure you understand what type of critique the author wants.

2. Would That Critique be Helpful to You?
The best way to make sure your critique will be helpful is to read it back to yourself, as if someone had written it in response to one of your stories. While reading, ask yourself, "Would this critique be helpful to me?" The purpose of critiquing a story is not to tear down the author, nor is it to build her up. The purpose is to help her make the prose match the vision she has for the story. I don't think anyone would disagree with this general principle, but it is amazing how many unhelpful critiques get sent to authors.

Be sure to phrase your critique in a way that the author can stomach. If it's not palatable, it's not useful. There is a difference between constructive advice and a harshly written critique. An overly harsh critique is a waste of everyone's time since it's likely to be thrown out, but by no means should it be sappy sweet either. Keep the author's POV and goals into consideration when writing your critique and you can't go wrong.

3. Whose Story Is It Anyway?
One of the most difficult aspects of doing a critique, especially for people who haven't done many of them, is how to position the advice given to the author. The key to writing a helpful critique lies in how you choose to read the story. In other words, don't pleasure read it and don't read it while imagining how you would have written the story – cuz you're not the author.

Read the story with the goal of understanding what the author was attempting to do and then ask yourself these questions: Was she successful? Why was she/wasn't she successful? What can she do to realize her vision? From this position, you can then give story advice that is both pertinent and helpful to the author. Remember, this isn't about how you would write the story if you were the author. It's about helping the author achieve her vision for the story she wrote.

A technique that's really effective in this regard: state first what you think the author is trying to do and then tell her why it works or why it doesn't. Quite often, what you think she was trying to do isn’t close but your feedback will help her get where she wants to go.

4. It Can't All Be Bad
We've all picked up a story that was bad from the first misspelled word to the last dragging scene. We've all been there and we’ve all done that - I mean this literally. We've all salted our stories with faulty plots, shallow characters, boring scenes, and 'gulp' clunky prose. (Is this clunky? Geez, I hope not!) So, here's the thing, there is something good in the story you're reading and it's your job to find it. That's what critiquers do; they bring both the good and the bad to light.

The goal of a good crit is to get the author moving in the right direction rather than pushing her off the nearest bridge. Remember, we all know what it's like to receive the "you're story sucks" critique. It's not helpful and it's not really your place to judge if it sucks or not; it's your job to help the author reach her goal.

A technique that works well in this regard is remembering the five main elements of story: theme, plot, character, dialogue and prose. Chances are, the author has a really fine theme under all those typos, plot failures, wooden characters, stilted dialogue, and clunky prose.

Don't forget to the praise where praise is due. One hint is to look at the theme(s) within the piece. In fact, the theme is usually the heart of the story and it's usually the author's heart, too. Praising a praiseworthy theme will allow the rest of your critique to be heard by receptive ears.

5. But Why?
When an author includes objects, actions, phrases, etc. that aren't appropriate to the time or place of the story, it's a good idea to point out why. This is how an author learns from her mistakes, allowing her to look more carefully through the story for other items that are inaccurate. When a critiquer only points out what's wrong in a story, without giving any explanation, the author is likely to get lost in a mishmash of generic advice, unable to determine what advice to take and what advice to leave. As a result, the author is likely to label the critique as unhelpful and toss it out.

6. When Good Grammarians Go Bad
Who hasn't misused lay for lie of hang for hung? It's far too easy for a writer to make these mistakes and I would even go so far as to say it's even more difficult for an author to find them in their own text. So, for all of you grammarians with sharpened pencils who are ready to make merry with the corrections, have at it! But keep in mind that manuscripts packed with errors can quickly overwhelm you and the author. If you identify broad topics for the author to address in conjunction with a few line edit examples, you're going to make it easier for the author to understand and digest your critique.

7. To Line Edit or Not to Line Edit; That is the Question
Line editing can take a tremendous about of time. Do it at your own risk. Authors generally love detailed feedback that comes in palatable doses, so pick your battles. If you're going to line edit and provide a 5,000 word written critique you're going to make yourself crazy, but that's your call.

Line edits are most helpful with grammar, punctuation or spelling errors. When doing other types of line edits, you run the risk replacing the author’s voice with your own and those edits won’t be used. Can you blame her? A story needs a strong clear voice and if you edit your voice into the prose, you'll be diluting or confusing that voice.

If you run across something that just jumps out at you, screaming for you to rewrite it, put down the pen. Walk away. Then come back later and make a note or raise a question about the section of the story that has the problem; let the author use her own words to fix it. If you feel compelled to rewrite a section or if you'd like to offer a nice turn of phrase to the author - by all means, do so, but add the words "consider this" in front of your suggestions.

8. The Author vs. The Reader
One of the things that annoys me most (The Author) is when I receive a crit from the critiquer (The Reader) who doesn't like to address me directly. I recently received a crit that was full of statements like this: "... it seems as though the author first had a good 'devil-like' idea, decided the 'devil' was too obvious ..." Hello! I'm The Author, not some amorphous, nameless being who will be shattered by the comment that my concept wasn't clear to you. It really is ok to say "... you had a good 'devil-like' idea then decided the 'devil' was too obvious ..."

The above statement was in a crit that I received in an online workshop. Even though it was clear to me that he didn't understand what I was trying to do, I had to spend time de-irking myself before I could figure out how to make the story concept more concrete. Conversely, it's ok for you to say how "you" feel about the story. You don't need to refer to yourself as "The Reader" since that is implied by the fact that you wrote a very helpful critique.

9. Work Your Strengths
Very few people can give an all out, run the gamut, stellar critique of everything that is wrong or right in a story. Well, ok, maybe there are a few who can, but they are all full-time, big-name editors or professors, which most of us are not. Generally speaking, we are all budding writers who are busy navigating our own unique learning curve, a curve that includes identifying our strengths and weaknesses as we go. Personally, I don't want a person whose weakness is creating compelling characters to give me a critique on the deficiencies of my characters.

Instead, focus your critiques around what you do best. If you're great with plot then focus on the plot, if you're great with grammar then focus on grammar, if you're great with logic then focus on logic, etc, etc. Am I being too direct? Probably.

I'm sure there are people who will disagree with me on this because most critiquers can see problems in the prose. However, I would argue that most critiquers don't know the best fix for the problems they find. So, if you see a problem, point it out and leave it to the author to fix. Often, the author will know exactly how to fix the problem once she is aware of it.

10. Knowing When Enough Is Enough
The person for whom you are doing a critique is likely to receive feedback from multiple people. If her work has a lot of problems, focus on the main ones that you see in the text. Since each person doing a critique is likely to bring something different to the table, it is best not to overwhelm the author with a critique that is longer then her story.

Remember, there is no use in dropping a ten-ton bomb when one-ton will do the job. Plus, it's a lot easier for the author to take in suggestions if she doesn't feel like she is being assaulted with advice. Would you want to be buried by one person's fix-it list or listen to one person go on and on about what's wrong with your story for fifteen minutes (or more!) without taking a breather?

There is a point of no return when the author’s receptors shut down and all she hears is Charlie Brown's mother talking. Wah-wha-wah-wha-wah-whan. So, be a self-aware critiquer and your crit will go a long long way toward helping the author.

Sometimes it makes a lot of sense to ask the author what kind of review she's looking for. Some of us would love to have someone dissect our work. Some of us take that as an insult. Keep in mind the kind of feedback the author asked for, and you won't go wrong.


Note: These guidelines are a "work in progress." If you have additions, comments, changes, suggestions, etc., please let me know.