My Advice for Writing a Critique Letter
One of my favorite parts of school has been workshops.
If done correctly workshops are where you can learn exactly what your writing does well and where you need to work a little harder. When done incorrectly workshops can leave a writer feeling defeated or thinking that their peers “just don’t get it.”
One of the more difficult aspects of workshop is writing your own critique letter for another writer. You want to be insightful but not subjective, honest but not mean or harsh, and you want to make sure that your critique letter provides actionable ways to improve the writing. It can be a lot, especially when you reader either a fantastic piece or a piece that just doesn’t spark for you.
I’ve been there before and there have been countless of times where I felt like my critique notes weren’t great, which left me feeling like I failed a fellow writer. But after getting my bachelors and currently in the middle of getting my masters (both in English with a lot of creative writing classes) I’ve picked up a few tricks for making a critique that matters.
1. Stop thinking like a writer and start thinking like a reader
It can be really easy to get caught up in the technical side of things when reading a piece submitted for a class or workshop, but only looking at the mechanics of writing, or just at the prose can be unhelpful for the writer being critiqued. Most of the time, when I submit a piece to a workshop I know exactly where I need to improve my prose, or grammar, or whatever else, but what I’m usually struggling with is plot, whether or not the movements the characters makes sense, scene progression, transitions etc. That’s where I want the focus to be when in a workshop.
And I know its different for every writer out there, but having a focus on the actual story/narrative part of a piece can be extremely valuable for the writer being critiqued. And I know not every writer is a reader, just like how not every reader is a writer, but when it comes to critique letters it’s important to use a reader perspective, because that is usually the end goal for a writer: to write something that readers will want to read.
2. Critique letters are not about you
Okay, hear me out. I know that if you’re reading this post its probably because you are in school right now and that is where your workshops are. And it can be really easy to get wrapped up in thinking that if you don’t “sound smart” in your critique letter you’ll get a bad grade, but trust me when I say this: no one cares how big of words you use, or how intellectual you are in your critiques. Critique letters are NOT about you. Critique letters are NOT about your personal style of writing. Critique letters are NOT about your preferred genre. Critique letters are NOT about you getting to show off how much better you think you are than the writer being critiqued.
Critique letters about helping a fellow writer improve their writing. That’s it. Critique letters are about them. And that’s a good thing because the more writers that improve out there the better the reading market, which means more fun and engaging pieces for others to read. So, when in doubt ask yourself these questions: Is my critique objective? Is it helpful? Is it something that can really help the writer improve? and most importantly, is my critique written with kindness?
And with that last question we move on to the next point.
3. Brutal honesty is bullshit
There is a right way to word a critique and a wrong way to word a critique. You can still write honest critiques while still being kind in the way you word them. You don’t have to flatter the writer, but you also don’t have to tear them down. For example, the following is a “brutally honest” critique that I found on Reddit: “There’s no actual plot, you’re just hiding your lack of writing skills with emotion, literary devices, and fancy words” As a writer there have been times where I’ve thought this about someone else’s work, just as I’m sure there are times someone has thought this about my work.
But the problem with the “brutal honest” in the example is that it is worded in a way that cuts down the writer rather than inspires them to improve. The example is also written in an accusatory fashion, i.e. “your lack of writing skills” = “you are a bad writer” which again, could totally be true, but good writing can be learned and labeling someone as a bad writer can demoralize them and cause them to quit writing altogether. A way that I would word this critique, while keeping the honesty of the statements is this: “Whereas your prose is beautiful and your emotions are strong, one place where this piece could be worked on more is the plot…” then I would give them specific points about the plot that could be strengthened or where I was confused. And the point I am making here is that you can be honest, but make sure that your honesty is worded in a way that achieves a desired effect.
4. When in doubt, focus on what you know
Trying to critique a pieces that doesn’t spark you can be frustrating. Maybe its boring, or you come up blank when thinking about how it can be improved, or maybe you feel like the pieces is uncritiqueable (yes I know that’s not a word, just go with it). Whatever the case is, even when it feels like pulling teeth, there is always something you can find about a piece that needs help. If you like something in the piece say it, I know it can be easy for writers to only focus on what needs improvement but encouragement can be just as helpful. But if the piece is boring try to convey that n a kind way; for example: “I felt like this piece could by more engaging by…” and then list out some ways that would make the piece more interesting, like maybe there was a character that you felt had potential, or a scene that could’ve gone deeper.
One thing that I always lean on when critiquing a piece that doesn’t really speak to me one way or the other is I focus on the emotions/vibes of the piece. For example, during my undergrad there was a piece that I absolutely loved in workshop, but I was having a hard time coming up with how to critique it because I initially felt that there was no way to improve an already amazing story, so I focused on the emotional side of it in my critique letter. Here is a paragraph that demonstrates what I’m talking about:
“As for the world building, I just have like a few notes that I feel would put the sparkle on an already fantastically built world. First the emotional aspect of the culture of these people in the story. For example, it seems like the display of “positive” emotions are encouraged in the culture, but the display of “negative” emotions are discouraged in the culture. I feel like if this was more clearly addressed in the story it would make the scenes between [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] in the flashback (which by the way was transitioned into and out of insanely well, like omg!) that much more impactful and sweet and emotional as well as forging the connection between [REDACTED] and the readers faster.”
5. Pay attention to what the writer would like you to focus on
I know there are different structures for writing workshops, but the one that I’ve encountered most is where the writer being critiqued includes what they would like the readers to focus on in their critiques. And keep in mind, this could be a double edged sword for the writer. On one hand this can help to focus on what they feel needs improvement, but on the other hand it can blind them to what other areas need improvement. But as the critic it is your job to strike balance when helping the writer. With that said, the first part/main focus of your critique should be what the writer wants you to focus on and then the next part of the critique can be the extra stuff you noticed. And I know doing this can be frustrating but I promise you it will be more diplomatic than to completely ignore what the writer says they need, especially in a classroom workshop.
