I am often asked to critique my friends’ work. I consider it an occupational hazard. Of course, I also offer manuscript critiques as part of my business. I enjoy doing them, but recognize they can present a few challenges and always proceed with caution. This is especially true with new or unpublished writers, although it’s tricky with anyone who does not understand what an in-depth critique looks like. The last thing I want is to alienate another writer or come off as harsh, but I admit I have been blamed of that in the past. The problem is that what I consider a constructive critique (one that I ask for myself) is more detailed and direct than most writers want.
I’ve been writing a long time and have thick skin. I also know only honest criticism is going to help me get better.
For the purpose of this article, I am going to focus on fiction reviews—those manuscript critiques that dig deeply into POV, through-lines, character motivation, logic flow, structure, and all of the other elements that result in a strong story. Grammar too, but not as the main point of the critique. Client projects are a different beast and require a lot more diplomacy and flexibility. We’ll save that topic for another day.
An in-depth manuscript critique for novels and fictional works delves into the structural issues as much as the writing mechanics. It looks at story logic and consistency. Character development and plausibility. It digs into every aspect of the manuscript and looks for holes, flaws, and awkward moments.
My critiques involve a lot of questions, concerns, and marking up of the manuscript. Not everyone is ready for that. As a way to protect everyone involved, I have come up with my top dozen rules for doing a critique. I check this list before I agree to critique a manuscript and discuss it with the writer so we can agree on their expectations before I begin.
My Top 12 Rules:
1. Be sure your opinion is wanted. Sometimes people just want to hear, “Hey, this is great” and nothing more. They want a pat on the back more than they want an honest review. That’s fine, but it helps to know that ahead of time. It’s far easier for me and them.
2. Be sure it is the writer who wants a review. You may ask how this is different from the first point? Trust me, it is. Once a friend asked me to review a screenplay and give detailed commentary. Only later did I find out it was not her work, but someone else’s who had no idea I was taking a look, much less providing detailed notes on how to improve the work. Talk about awkward. Now I make certain to speak to the actual writer. No go-betweens. This leads me to my next point…
3. Set expectations. Be sure to set the parameters on what is wanted. Does the writer want a quick review (thumbs up, thumbs down) or a more detailed review, complete with commentary and questions? It makes a difference. Don’t offer a line-by-line edit to someone who is expecting a quick email of initial thoughts. It will come off harsh and strain your relationship. Define terms and what you can offer. Likewise, if you are asking for a critique from a Beta reader, explain what you expect from them. Discuss it before you send a manuscript. I attach a cover sheet detailing what I would like, always taking their strengths and experience into consideration and only after asking if they are willing to provide what I am requesting. I am as comprehensive as possible, even offering a checklist for easy reference and abbreviations to use.
4. Whenever possible, offer your review in person or at least on a video call so you can gauge how your comments are being received. That way you can adjust your tone as necessary or explain what you mean in more detail. It is difficult to convey emotion and tone in email. When it comes to critiquing someone’s work, it is best to deliver the news face-to-face. It helps eliminate hurt feelings and gives you the opportunity to explain what you mean so they aren’t left trying to interpret your word choice.
5. Be respectful. This one is self-explanatory. Do not disrespect the writer no matter what the quality of the work. It’s not nice or professional. It also doesn’t help him or her improve.
6. Be kind. Again, this should be obvious. Don’t intentionally hurt someone’s feelings or make them feel stupid. It is, after all, just your opinion. Be sensitive to the writer’s reaction and give your critique in a way that keeps it about the work. They may have a reason for how they wrote the piece that you are not seeing. It doesn’t mean that way is working, but it does mean that you can discuss the problems in a helpful way.
7. Offer tangible criticism. If you are going to take the time to read and review someone’s work, do it in a way that helps them. Ask specific questions: Why does the character do this at this time? Is there a reason your villain did that? Mark sections that are awkward, but say why it’s awkward. Ask for clarification when needed. Mark areas that need grammatical help, if that’s been requested. I tend to focus more on logic flow, story, character development, setting, and the bigger picture in the first critique. If I notice a grammatical weakness, I will suggest the writer watch out for that particular area (i.e. watch out for subject/verb agreement, particularly in chapter 2). I ask my beta readers to mark the page each time they stop reading and why they stopped. It’s fine if they stop to do something time-specific, like pick up the child from school, but it’s not great if they stopped because they were bored. That means I need to rewrite the section.
8. Guide writers to problem areas, but don’t offer fixes. I subscribe to Neil Gaiman’s editing advice when he says that when people say that something is wrong, they are usually right. When those same people offer ways to fix it, they are usually wrong. He’s right. Guide the writer to areas that need work and ask questions and comments that highlight what you think is wrong. Let the writer fix it. Do not rewrite the story. It’s not yours to fix. You are a guide only.
9. Keep your commentary fairly broad before you offer specific critique. I always divide my comments into two sections so I am ready to go deeper if it is wanted, but gives me an out if the broad comments are enough. Again, this is typically only necessary with new or sensitive writers.
10. Start with something you liked about the piece before moving on to what didn’t work for you. Also try using “I” statements. “Chapter three didn’t work for me. I found it…” or “I was confused when the character did….” This helps reinforce the idea that you are offering your opinion and not facts about the story. It helps couch the comments.
11. Stay objective. This is not your story to muck around in. Your role as a critique partner is to offer your opinion on what works and what does not and to ask questions that will help the writer go deeper. A critique is not about you or the writer as a person. Stay focused on the work and be professional.
12. Offer resources if you notice an area that is weak. For example, if you notice that your writer friend would benefit from deeper POV, point them to an article or book that helped you in that area. People are often more open to taking advice from a book than a friend or colleague. If you can help, offer to do that, but let the writer choose whether to accept your help or not.
Writing is an act of creation and is personal. Tread lightly. Proceed with caution. And good luck. If you want to hire a professional critique, get in touch. I’d be happy to speak with you.