A recent Twitter conversation started by Scott Roche about public critique, specifically for podcast novels got me thinking about critiques, flames and feedback.
I replied to Scott that as an author you have to expect to get all three. So here’s my take on dealing with them as an author.
The middle one Flames are characterised by negativity upon negativity- nothing positive, no encouragement, no suggestions for improvement and are usually full of bitterness and axe-grinding. You can spot them a mile away.
Yes, these attacks might annoy and/or upset me for half an hour. I imagine pouring a rain of fire back, but I never do. The most I have ever done is send back a polite ‘thank you, I’m sorry you don’t like what I do, but maybe in the future you’ll try again’. Flamers just want attention. They want you to pour gasoline on- so in return I recommend giving them a bucket of water and then putting them out of your mind.
Critiques are another matter. People have taken time to write them, and I will always give them more consideration. They usually contain ‘I really liked your book but…’
When you get one of these you should pay more attention, but you will want to run it through a process.
As a reference librarian you learn to do one important thing- judge the source. For scientific accuracy an article on an internet forum is always considered less reliable than an article in a peer reviewed journal.
So I do the same with critique and feedback.
Top of my list is of course my agent Laurie Maclean and my editor at Ace. Their opinion is right up there. They’re professionals, and they have a real interest in my books selling well. They are invested in my success.
Second are my beta readers. These are people I have picked because I value their opinion and know they will give me honesty. They have skills and knowledge that are specifically targeted at what I am doing.
And finally comes public feedback. Criticism here is a free for all- and that’s perfectly fine. Luckily we live in places where an opinion is your right, and hopefully (unless you are in some totalitarian state) you can express it on the internet.
So here’s how I deal with criticism. I let the initial pain and outrage pass. I don’t fire off an email in anger. I don’t go on twitter, or to my blog and lambast the writer. I let it sit. (In this way replying to critique is like editing, best done cold)
I let it rest until I can logically examine what they are saying. I may go to my beta readers/listeners and say ‘What do you think? Does this guy have a point?’ I am lucky enough to have several very honest people in my circle (Dan Sawyer I am looking at you). If they confirm what this person has said then I add more weight to the scale.
And then after that process I will reply, in a calm, polite, measured way. Sometimes I change things, sometimes I will not. We are not artists doing things by committee after all, and we have to, at the end of the day, believe in our work.
So that’s my process for dealing with criticism, which may make it sound easy but it’s not. Believe me, this is coming from a person that cried for half an hour when she got her first professional critique. However I got over it, and the book was better for it.
What I will not let criticism do is stop me from doing what I love- which is writing and podcasting. We may get our ego bruised, but we still go on.