Critiquing

by Janet Lane Walters

First there is critiquing and then there is criticism. Critiquing is looking at a manuscript and noting the good points and the points where it fails to inspire you as a reader. Criticism is for reviewers.

Critique groups come in many varieties. There are small groups where the number of participants is limited from three to six. In this kind of group, there is the chance to listen and to discuss in depth. One disadvantage is that the people in the group may become too close to the author whose writing is being critiqued or too familiar with the work to be able to see the flaws.

In a large group where any number of people participate, there are many ears to listen to what is being read and each person may find something, both good and not so good about the manuscript. Sometimes the number of comments can confuse the writer, especially when the comments disagree.

One-to-one critiquing can be a partnership. This usually involves a typed manuscript and the opinion of a single person. This makes for a continuity of opinion and can involve a larger amount of material. The problem can lie with the reader who may either hate the material and not give it a fair read -- or love it and miss major flaws.

Critiquing can be done in a number of ways. Oral critiques involve listening and talking. Written critiques involve reading and writing. Critiquing can be done for contests, and the feedback is usually dependent on the type of contest. Line editing and fine tuning can be done by passing the same copy of the manuscript among several people, so that you have several opinions on the points raised by each reader.

There are a number of things to look for when critiquing. A sense of time and place, development of major and minor characters, internal and external dialogue, the situation, the use of point of view, writing voice as in passive and active voice, showing not telling, a hypnotic prose pattern that makes the reader fall into the rhythm and lose the sense of the words, too much or too little conflict or tension, tempests in teapots, too much or too little emotion, grammar, spelling and punctuation. Does the story begin in the right place? Are there pauses in the action for too much explanation, background or detail that could be given at another time, place or in a different way? Does each scene advance the story or does it repeat material already known?

Guidelines for the person whose work is being critiqued:

1. Stick to the page limit or make a special arrangement to read more.
2. Don't read too fast.
3. Listen to the critiques without interrupting to justify, explain or argue about an opinion. All critiques are subjective, unless grammar or facts are challenged. You are the final judge of whether to change the material.
4. If three people have the same opinion, consider making changes. Words are the only way you have to give a reader a clear picture of your story.

Guidelines for the critiquer:

1. Listen to what is read. If something is unclear or was read too fast, ask for a passage to be re-read.
2. Don't interrupt another critiquer to add your opinion or to argue. While you wait your turn, jot down notes about what you want to say.
3. Keep your comments to the point.
4. Don't use your time to focus on how you would have written the material.
5. If you have nothing to add, pass.
6. Write your comments to remind yourself of the points you want to make, and to give to the writer.

Janet Lane Walters is the published author of five novels, a number of short stories, poetry and non-fiction books. She is currently treasurer of the Hudson Valley RWA. This article originally appeared in the April 1997 issue of A Word About Romance. GDRWA thanks the Hudson Valley chapter for allowing us to reprint it.

Back to Articles home page