Basically, my critiquer didn’t like my protagonist and called her a “spoiled brat”. This fellow author did start with “what I’d done well” and offered helpful suggestions. However, her saying that my heroine WAS a spoiled brat—instead of was BEHAVING like a spoiled brat—was somehow especially hurtful.

Even more difficult, however, was the blow to my still-wobbly confidence in my skills as a writer. I’d recently come to feel that I am doing publishable work. Her opinion (shared by some other members of the group) that my protagonist was not as sympathetic as I believed was VERY difficult to hear.

There is a silver lining in this cloud. The experience has brought to the surface the main demon from my past that has stopped me from pursuing writing as my career. I am now confronting this “boogeyman” instead of running away from it, and am hopeful of gaining the confidence I need.

The rule of “Be Kind, Be Helpful, or Begone” on 5000bc is good, as are their guidelines: 1) What I like about your work. 2) Where I see it’s a problem. 3) Why it’s a problem. 4) What are possible solutions. 5) Resources or links that may be helpful.

However, in a writer’s group it’s also vital to remember that the material one is critiquing rises from the author’s vulnerable center. One needs to respect that the person has done his or her best work, and is sharing something from their innermost spirit. This may be equally true of more business-oriented ventures, depending on the entrepreneur’s reasons for pursuing that venture. Thus, the importance of Be Kind whenever offering a critique of someone’s work!

PS — LOVE CHOCOLATE (hint!)

- Wow, that was a great comment.
- But I don’t agree with it, because of the research.
- Still, that post was superb.

And the only line you’d be likely to focus on was the middle one. So it’s probably better to be straight up to begin with. I think most people want you to be straight up if you don’t go nuts with your critical appraisal.

Funny I read this post at an opportune time, because I just submitted a document in 5000 BC to be critiqued. A few people have seen it so far and had some good feedback for me. Still waiting for some more.

Your policy for yourself and others in 5ooo BC of limiting suggested fixes to one thing at a time, not only allows us to fix things step by step but also preserves self confidence. You don’t end up thinking you are a total dummy! LOL

That’s if any formula is to be followed.

But thing is, Critique is actually the wrong (old) paradigm. We do need to go beyond tiptoeing around giving REAL feedback. Mirroring is one of the main benefits of any inter-relating. Subconsciously the totality of the feedback is transmitted immediately. And that totality has both good and bad in it.

Then again, only loving and positive has its own way of removing the potential objects of critique …

I enjoyed your article. In fact, I’ve sent it to a rather brash colleague.

Andrew