Do you mean it's better for a writer if their editor dislikes the writer's work? I would have thought the opposite.

I suppose what I'm saying is that while it's lovely to have people enjoy your work, in my case the most useful feedback I've had so far came from an editor who hated it. The book in question was one I started as part of the Master's, so a lot of people had critiqued it. I ended up receiving a distinction for it. In all that time I never once heard: 'this is nasty.' When a certain editor used those words, I thought, you know what? Maybe it is. It came as a revelation to me and enabled me to write a book that I'm more proud of. I would never have written Novel 2 in its current form if it was not for that pissed-off editor.

Things work out in funny ways, don't they?

At the time I thought that the most important thing in the world was selling Novel 1. Now I can see that the most important thing was to write another better book.

Blimey, I'm sounding very certain of the worth of Novel 2. Agent hasn't even read it yet. Shudders.

Sarah

Mighty congratulations!

Pete

Sorry Pete (and everyone reading this now who may be finding this bitchin' uncomfortable) I don't mean to come across as aggressive, but you've spent the entire thread basically saying that you shouldn't crit something you don't like, for some unknown reason, then you say to Lisa:

"I haven't said negative criticism isn't useful"

Yeah, you have. Otherwise we wouldn't be at this point in this stupid debate. You may not think you said that, but then maybe you should clarify what you write, rather than just spouting self-reverential shite.

Then you say this:

"Do you mean it's better for a writer if their editor dislikes the writer's work? I would have thought the opposite."

Of course she doesn't mean that! Why the hell would anyone think that?

You're just trying to belittle people's arguments, and you do it very badly.

I'm bowing out of this anyway, I just cannot be arsed. I don't know what your problem is, but you can keep it.

Sarah, congratulations! That's great news. Just shows persistence pays not only in submitting things, but also in working and re-working a piece.

Davey, I'd love some advice on the proper way to combine Spandex with a feather boa without getting the boa wound round my six-inch stilettos and rubbing all the glitter off them.

Going back to the like/dislike thing. I think it's important to separate out whether you dislike a piece because it's badly written, or because you dislike the theme or subject.

I never dislike a piece because it's badly written, I just think it's badly written. If I'm reading a book for fun I might say casually 'I didn't like it' but that's not really what's happening. If I'm trying to critique it, liking or disliking doesn't come into it: I'll try to analyse what's bad about the writing in terms of what it's trying to do and failing, and suggest ways of making it succeed. But there's a subjective element here, obviously, because my suggestions aren't going to be the same as someone else's.

On the other hand I do dislike or find un-engaging particular themes and subjects, and probably wouldn't willingly critique them because I can't or don't want to work out what the author's trying to do, so can't offer much help. But that is a wholly subjective thing, which is nothing to do with whether a piece is well-written or not, and everything to do with my personal tastes. I would endeavour not to inflict those on the writer, except in deciding whether or not to critique something in the first place.

Going back to the 'offering solutions' question.

I think it's true that 'offering solutions' can seem like the reader trying to write the book. If I actually suggest some replacement words, it's always in the spirit of illustrating my point, rather than substituting my better [sic] version. But usually what I'm trying to do is to point out what's not quite working in a way that means the writer comes up with their own solution. Certainly and I try to remember to say, 'that's my solution - you'll have your own.'

Interestingly, this is not a problem confined to aspiring writers. My agent thinks it's a drawback to have an editor who's her/himself a writer, because they're always trying to writer their book onto yours. Can't say I've found it to be so, but who knows?

Emma

<Added>

Lisa, I think that points out the difference between a Masters teacher and an Editor. With a Masters, because they're very properly interested in process, if you can produce a reason for doing it as you have, it'll get approved. An editor doesn't care why you did it, just whether it works for them as a representative reader. I think both approaches are hugely valuable - I'd hate to think of Masters courses being run solely by editors - but they are different, even when they overlap.

Lisa

Generally and in the context of a long-term critiqueing relationship such as that between an editor and an author I imagine having the editor like the work would be better than otherwise. And that's an extension of what I'm trying to say about critiqueling on WW, that it's better to receive critiques from people who are in tune with your efforts and enjoy at some level what you are trying to do. The site is, after all, about support and encouragement as much as it is about improvement.

You had a good experience with that particular respected editor but I note that even then you spent half a day spitting blood. My remarks about critting were very much about what goes on within WriteWords (which isn't a professional editing environment) and so I wonder how valuable or welcome or even acceptable a negative critique from a peer member who dislikes another member's work is going to be, when it hurts for a hardened crittee such as yoourself to take it in the neck from a top professional who really knows what they're talking about.

On a general note not directed at you Lisa, I would say that members who are making a go of writing a novel might be well served if they're seeking objective professional advice and opinions by taking on one of the professional editorial services.

I realise that Sunday Painters such as myself have a less hardcore and less professional approach compared to some, but I do still take the writing process seriously and I work hard at it. Likewise the critting process.

Pete

Davy

You need to show me where I've said negative criticism isn't useful. If that's what you've thought then it explains why you've taken up the argument.

As for belittling other people's arguments, I'm not trying to do that at all.

Pete

<Added>

Davy maybe I've just not been clear enough: when I say I prefer to crit a piece I like, I do mean crit it. As in make criticisms. I guess you thought I just meant say nice things about it. Which explains this whole dumb argument. Sorry.

Generally and in the context of a long-term critiqueing relationship such as that between an editor and an author I imagine having the editor like the work would be better than otherwise.

Agreed.

Pete, you know what? Bearing in mind everything I've said, I must admit to being something of a hypocrite. I was just thinking about how I treat WW critiquing and unless something deeply offends me and I feel compelled to say so, generally if I don't like something, I don't critique it.

I think it's cowardly of me and galling to admit, but if I see lots of what I consider problems, I shy away from it, because I don't want to have to point them all out and feel that I've assassinated the piece.

It's all a bit confusing really, because although I benefitted from an editor 'hating' my work, I'm mostly too lily-livered to critique a work that I seriously dislike.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't practise what I preach. Oh dear. Another thing to feel guilty about.

Pete, let's forget it, I'm confusing myself now, you probably did say that, I dunno. I think I see what you mean, I just have different experiences with Site Experts I guess. Sorry for being overly narky.

Emma - it's easy, you just make sure the boa has at least three revolutions around your neck, then you put extra glitter everywhere, including on your face. The stillettos should be sweet, and if you run out of glitter, you got six inch platforms, so no-one can touch you Just avoid chasing people and drains. Not chasing drains. You know what I mean.

Actually it's like the oppposite of what I say about writing; just splash it all over!

Lisa - don't feel guilty, you can slag my stuff off anytime

Davy

xx

Lisa

Don't worry, I feel guilty about pissing off he who flies in the skies.

Apologies for turning into ArguMan!

Pete

In my view, part of the confusion running through this thread is down to the fact that WW is open-access. Tough, honest, detailed critiquing between writers requires an agreed system and etiquette. Which doesn't mean no one on this site should critique thoroughly and honestly, just that if they do, they should expect a variety of attitudes in response.

I'm the site expert referred to by a couple of people on this thread, who helped them with their work, and I'd like to say publicly that the pleasure really does work both ways. Both of you have tremendous potential, although you are very different types of writer, and I really enjoyed working with you, Kevin's red retorts aside. Actually, Kevin, I think it's a wise thing to do, to remind yourself of initial resistance. I was the same with my first editor, and still blush when I recall my early 'explanations' of why she hadn't quite got the point.

I agree with Emma, that critiquing is good for your own work. I've started to get work from the business sector, via friends, and it's much better paid than what you can charge impoverished authors. So, it's tempting to do more of it. But I don't think it will have the same satisfaction, and impact on my own writing.

As for the like/dislike issue, if you're taking work from all directions, this isn't really an issue. There is personal taste, of course, but you put that on one side and look to what the writer is trying to do within his chosen genre or style.

Terry

Pete, no worries, it's all interesting stuff.

You can be ArguMan, Davy's clearly Superman (the only sky-flyer of any worth) and I'll be Guiltgirl.

I'm in a perpetual state of guilt. I'm currently feeling guilty for a number of things, including eating a chocolate muffin and some raw pasta for lunch.

Oh, and for not being brave enough to confront my psychopathic next door neighbour. Mr Nutjob spent last night standing in his garden (my bedroom window overlooks it) and verbally abusing his girlfriend for locking him out.

There was whistling, stone-throwing, cursing, liberal use of the F and C words, screaming, bawling, and eventually prolonged smashing of the BBQ against the patio door.

He started at 11:30pm and gave up at 7:15am when I went out to sweep the decking (my passive aggressive method of alerting him to my existence).

The lights were on in every house in the block. Don't think anyone in a one mile radius had any sleep.

I don't think his girlfriend was even in the house.

I just rang my mum and told her. She said: 'Awww, it was so cold last night. Did you offer him a cup of tea?'



<Added>

Cross-posted with you Terry. I particularly agree with this:

"Which doesn't mean no one on this site should critique thoroughly and honestly, just that if they do, they should expect a variety of attitudes in response."

That's why it's on the wall Terry, staring right back at me. It also puts it into perspective that others have done the same thing. It's all about learning and devloping as a writer and a person.

It's still not a 'nice' thing to be the recipient of criticism and it takes a lot of guts to open yourself up and accept it, turning it to your advantage. Better here than in the Times first authors' review.

Kev.

PS. Davster, this spandex really creases me up.

ArguMan typically brings down his foes using small spinning pieces of micro-argument which uncannily penetrate their arguments by missing the point entirely.

Some interesting views here. Personally, I can certainly see the value of someone outside your chosen genre, who isn't into what you're doing, offering up a crit. How much more objective could you get?

Lisa C's invaluable critique of my novella proved most helpful. It gave me a different feminist view of something I'd written, and made me question my approach. Casey, who writes chick lit, which couldn't be further removed from cyberpunk horror, also gave a detailed and insightful critique, also allowed me to see the effect my writing had on a wider, less involved, audience, and I was extremely grateful for that too.

So, I wanted to illustrate in action (if that's the right term), rather than words, how useful an crit can be from someone who doesn't normally dig your scene. A good critique should be objective, and that is all.

Pete, you also made some rather negative comments on that story. What were you saying again about not giving critiques to writing you don't like?

JB

Oh God, my weirdo next door neighbour is locked out and acting mental again. Does anyone know if I can call the police? Do I need to wait until he starts trying to smash the window in again? Aaaaaarrrrgggghhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!

Pete, by the way, Guiltgirl transmits her infectious guilt and weakens her foes by turning them into equally guilt-ridden specimens...