I just received a crit (from outside Hatrack) that said the whole story was good--except for two points. The writing, it said, was quite unprofessional, and the setting was not very good either (without telling me what the problem was with my setting). On top of that, I got a grammar lesson on the use of conjunctions that didn't ring true to me.

I know this is not true. No, this is not me arguing with crits, but it so happens that those are the two strong points of my writing in general, and none of the other crits of that story made me feel as though it had a problem in those areas.

Anyway, I'm just angry. Baffled, and angry.

Thanks for taking the time to read my story! I appreciate your efforts.

There are three things I think are important to remember about critiques in general. First, the critiquer may simply not get the story. Not everyone does, no matter what the story is.

The second, is that the critiquer may not be at your skill level, and therefor may give you completely wrong advice. The good part is, that if you truly are above the critiquer's level, then you will instantly know they are wrong, and can ignore them.

The third thing is that some critiquer's aren't good at the task of evaluating other's stories. I personally see way too many critiques that try to tear a story apart, thinking that's what they are supposed to do--be critical. Instead, it'd be nice if everyone understaood their real job is to help the author make improvements by truly evaluating both good and bad, and offering suggestions and encouragement.

It's like the old adage, 'The Customer Is Always Right'. Well, I can tell you, they aren't and every critique isn't valuable either. That said, it's still good to thank them for their time, since they did invest some of it in their review of the story. They did give you that consideration, at least.

Be sure to use the name of the website as their first name so they get emails like

Hatrack, Lowest Mortgage Rates ever!!!

That would be a bad idea, so don't do that.

Honestly just go with Beth's response. Me I just post a reply that says "Thank you."

I'm of the "feel free to argue" school of thought, though, where you ask them what they had in mind and also defend what you had in mind. (I'm aware that lots 'round here don't share that view.)

The second rule trumps the first rule. Besides, you aren't really baffled, you're just angry.

Sometimes I do get crits that annoy me. Sometimes they're right. I have more "fun" (actually, it's probably not that much fun) turning over in my mind the ones I think are really really wrong.

So, here's another question about offensive critiques:

I belong to a writing group, and we rotate submitting stories for critique on a weekly basis. One of our group has some serious problems with punctuation, grammar, spelling, and some glaring structural issues to the plot/story. I did a pretty thorough critique on her first few chapter submissions (it's a novel).

Apparently she wrote the entire novel out, and is now submitting it 2-3 chapters at a time. She is not taking the critiques we've given her on earlier chapters and using that information to revise her ongoing submissions. She even apologized last time she submitted, saying that she hadn't bothered to clean it up.

Was I off base to tell her "I've already said everything I have to say about your work as is, and I decline the opportunity to critique more of the same"?

I know I offended her. But I feel somewhat offended myself that I'm being asked to use my precious time critiquing for the same blatant errors over and over. If she was making an effort to cleaning up her manuscripts and trying to improve each round, I wouldn't mind the time at all. But at this point I see no evidence that my comments are being of any use. In my opinion, an ongoing group critiquing a novel really needs to see if the writer is improving, and we can't tell what the writer needs continual help with if we constantly see the skill level they had when they first joined the group.

I wouldn't take it offensively, it'd be a better use of time to just fix the errors and improve my skills.

[Edited to fix a mistake and to add an answer to your question.]

When the woman asked if the author had written any "fan fiction," the author said she'd written some nonfiction about Star Wars.

The woman wrote back and said that she was telling the author for her own good that she couldn't write nonfiction about Star Wars because Star Wars isn't true.

The author did not write back. She said she couldn't stop laughing long enough to write.

I think you have every right to refuse to spend more time on a story when the writer can't be bothered to try to improve it.

I think that given you have been/will be published by 4 different publications and you regularly impress the pants off everyone who reads your stuff you have little to worry about here.

It may just be that this critiquer is expecting an overly literate style or some misplaced bs like that.

quote:

---

You never ever say thank you for clothes given by older relatives

---

It's okay to thank someone for their time if you feel that their critique represents an honest best effort. But you still should wait till you're calm enough to make that determination.

And who the hell cares about conjunctions anyway?

BTW: What is a conjunction?

"Conjunction Junction what's your function?"

I critiqued it for him, told him what to fix and grammar mistakes.

If I have strong feelings about a certain section, I'll advocate for my point of view. My primary reason at that point is to make sure the writer recognizes: here is a pitfall in your writing. If you choose to leave it as is, there will be a cost - alienation from your reader, loss of the ability to suspend disbelief, whatever. I'll identify what I think that cost will be to them.

Whether they fix it or not is really not my issue. (Unless they keep expecting me to critique the same mistakes over and over again.) After all, if they can leave something in that I felt was a blatant problem and STILL sell the story, then more power to them.

I try to be thorough when picking through a manuscript. The writer can accept or reject the crit as they please. But I worry that my thorough style will be offensive to some.