Why don't you love me?
How to hear feedback without dying.
I’ve never taught a writing class—if someone ever asked me, I would—but I’ve heard from creative writing teachers that classes often have a certain kind of student. They are the sort that don’t really want feedback, or criticism of any kind, but only want the teacher to exclaim “Oh my god, you are the most talented writer I’ve ever seen. What a gift you are to this class!”
So when this doesn’t happen there is a gnashing of teeth, a rending of fabric, and biblical levels of sadness.
To them I say, suck it up Buttercup.
Hmm… maybe that’s why I haven’t been asked to teach a class. But for reals, as the kids say (they don’t), this doesn’t only happen in the classroom. I’ve critiqued a lot of writers, even more so lately as more are asking me to read their work. I’ve seen a bit of a pattern emerge.
Here is my totally scientific observation of the different writer personalities receiving feedback. Note: I will be publishing my research in a respected journal (my fridge.)
1. The Ignorer
This type of writer hears all the feedback, but really doesn’t adapt any of it. They don’t get defensive like the Brawler (see next), it’s more that they don’t really put stock in anything you say. They usually never ask you for feedback again because you haven’t proclaimed their greatness. Plus, they think you suck.
2. The Brawler
This type of writer argues and sometimes flat-out fights you over your comments. They will defend the worst adverb saying that was what they wanted to say. Adding that all those people (led by Stephen King) who say adverbs should be shot on sight are wrong, and also kind of poopy. Also, you suck.
3. The Wayne’s Worlder
I’m not worthy they cry… and after hearing feedback, they roll up in a fetal position and tell you that you’ve crushed them—and because of your cruelness they’ll never write again. I haven’t seen a lot of these, but they’re out there. You can hear them whimper.
4. The Considerer
These are my fave. It’s what I strive to be—but know that I used to be a Brawler, for years really. Until I discovered I was an idiot. The Considerer thoughtfully mulls over the feedback. They don’t need to listen to all of it, utilize it, or even agree with all of it… but they take it seriously. They know that good, constructive feedback (from someone who knows what they are talking about… more on that later) can help them become a better writer.
I don’t see a lot of Considerers. But when I do, I know these are the writers that are going to make it. Many, like me, used to be the other types, but got tired of people telling them their work was good, or worse “just fine the way it is.” Don’t get me wrong, it’s lovely when a beta-reader tells you they like something—but it holds a lot more weight if they also tell you what’s not working… and why the previous two pages kind of sucked.
I could make a numbered list of the type of critique-givers too, but suffice to say that not all are created equal. My wife has a very critical eye, and she will tell me when she doesn’t like something. But she’s not a writer, and doesn’t know the craft at all. I’ll still listen (consider) what she says. She has pointed out some things where after a needed period of sullenness, I see that she was right. But she doesn’t know how to fix things, or really give any feedback that will help me discover a solution. Beta-readers who are not only writers, but writers who know the craft, are the best. Best of all are the ones who have read at least a few craft books (I’m always surprised when I learn a writer doesn’t read books about writing).
The other side of this street are those who give unhelpful, also known as “shitty”, feedback. What you don’t want is someone telling you how your story should go, or what you should change or add to make it better.
“I think you should have a bear in this scene.”
“It’s a married couple in their kitchen!”
“Yeah, but a bear would make it more interesting.”
“No it would not.”
“Rawr! Yeah, like that.”
What I try to do when giving feedback is help a writer say what they are trying to say. I know, deep, right? It’s not about me inserting my own ideas about plot or character or theme—it’s about telling the writer that this isn’t ringing true. Or this structure, or way of telling the story, is not working. Often it’s about cutting words, or clarifying ideas that are on the page, but need to be brought out. And maybe add a bear.
Sorry. Bears on the mind now.
I’ve read several shelves full of craft books, and I continue to take classes. I’m in one right now, actually. I love to analyze other writer’s work, as it helps me analyze my own. The craft books, the good ones, help me articulate the problems I see. But as much as I know this stuff, I also really really (really) need beta-readers and good editors. When you get deep inside your own work, it’s hard to see the forest for the trees. You need someone who you trust to point out where you’ve wandered off the path. I think it was George Saunders who said writing a novel is like walking into the woods drunk—you’re walking on the path, but then you sort of wander off and lose yourself in the woods. The job of good editor, or beta-reader, is to get you back on the path. Saunders might not have said the drunken part—but the metaphor works for me.
So dear substack reader (and probably writer), strive to be a Considerer. Those writers who can do that, and also have a healthy, but not overwhelming, sense of doubt are the best writers. I do really think this. Those writers who think their work is the “shit”, like the kids say (they don’t), are losing the opportunity to become better.
Lastly, good feedback can sting. It can feel like those stages of grief… what are there 5, 7, 23? I forget. But in this case, the first three are anger, followed by pissy-ness, open weeping, and finally acceptance. Usually.
I’ve had readers shred my work, absolutely shred it. When I was first starting out, I had a writer I admired cut my work into little tiny pieces. It hurt. Ouch. But it also wasn’t that helpful. I try not to do that. I want to give a writer a clear and honest appraisal, but I don’t need to be an asshole about it. I’ve been lucky enough to find beta-readers and editors who I trust, who know a lot about the craft, give it to me straight, and once in a while tell me “hey, Craig, that’s pretty good.”
I wish the same for you.
Thanks as always for reading—feel free to shred this post and tell me why I suck… I can take it. Sort of.
Tell your friends, walk your dog, and feed the fish. See you around.
This is excellent. I used to be on a writer's page that gave great feedback, but then the thing fell apart because the moderator published a book and didn't have time to moderate the page and write bestsellers. (And he still does.) I learned to accept what criticism was thrown my way. I learned to use it as well. If you want, you can look at my writing and see if I actually learned anything while I was there. Granted, it was a Fantasy/Sci-Fi page, and I write a more literary style, I was grateful all the same for everyone that looked at my stories. https://benwoestenburg.substack.com/about
We are each our own worst critics, and often come away from the experience hating my own guts.