How Do You Respond to Criticism of Your Work? 6 Patterns to Recognize

how do you respond to criticism of your work

One of the most popular guest posts at my site this year is How to Spot Toxic Feedback, which discusses signs that the writing advice you’re receiving may do more harm than good.

Its success isn’t a surprise to me because writers who receive criticism, constructive or otherwise, almost never forget it—and this post gave writers of all stripes an opportunity to sigh with satisfaction and say, “I knew it all along. Such-and-such critique was invalid and harmful and I should’ve been ignoring it.”

That might be true when it’s inexperienced writers or readers offering the critique. (And that’s why writing groups can be more dangerous than helpful.)

But how about cases where the person offering feedback is an experienced professional—someone who makes a living at offering and selling informed feedback? (Like myself?)

Let’s assume (and I know it can be a big assumption) that the experienced professional is self-aware and careful, and can offer feedback that’s useful and isn’t delivered in bad faith—that it’s an accurate and fair assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the work, at least from a market perspective.

I’ve found that writers, if they trust the source, generally respond in a few key ways. Looking for the pattern of your response can be useful in understanding if you’re getting the most from professional feedback, or if you’re inadvertently sabotaging progress.

1. You defend what you’ve done.

This is the stereotypical response of the inexperienced writer, who gets prickly and looks for ways to defend their work or excuse the weaknesses.

But there are more subtle ways that writers defend their work without looking defensive. Writers can argue that they’re trying to work against formula, or break the mold of what’s typically done. Their work is more enlightened because it’s not blindly following in the footsteps of all the other mediocre work out there, or they believe they’re the exception to the rule.

Alternatively, writers may cite other positive opinions they’ve received. “My writing group loves this” is a common defense. Or, “I worked with [another] professional editor.”

It’s perfectly normal to think of all the reasons the feedback might be wrong. (And it’s right to do so—not all feedback is useful.) But you also should consider evidence that the feedback might be right.

2. You rush to make changes.

Some writers do exactly the opposite of defend their work: they immediately look for ways to fix the problem. Not just that, they try to fix the problem within 24 hours of it being pointed out. This can be as problematic as ignoring feedback because it results in cosmetic changes that don’t really affect the quality of the work.

This is my theory as to why so many prologues exist in unpublished manuscripts. At some point, the writer’s first chapter was criticized. The solution: add a prologue! But easy or fast fixes tend to have a high failure rate.

Quality feedback can lead to large-scale revision or edits. Such changes can rarely be made overnight or even in a week or month. If you pull on one thread in a story, or reconsider something as seemingly simple as your first page, you’ve suddenly got a rewrite on your hands. But some writers don’t have the patience or fortitude for that.

3. You get a second opinion.

This is not a bad idea, assuming you have the time (and the resources, budget and/or necessary relationships). But it can put responsibility on other people—who may not be appropriate—to figure out the best way forward with your work. Know when you’re seeking a second opinion because you’re looking for additional clarity or dialogue (because it always helps to talk these things through), and when you’re trying to get someone else to make the hard decisions for you.  Avoid taking your second (or third…) opinion back to the first person who offered you the feedback. They’re not likely interested in having an argument or defending their position; in the end, you are the arbiter of what’s best for the work.

4. You sit on the feedback for a while.

I’ve often heard experienced novelists say that when they receive feedback that makes them angry or upset, they immediately put it away and don’t act on it. Then, after a week or two, they go back to it, and see that much of it was correct.

Whether you react to feedback with ease or anger, it’s always wise to sit on feedback for at least a few days before making any big decisions about it, or even responding to it. Give yourself time to digest it and let the emotional reaction dissipate. Then you’ll have distance and be in a position to make the best decision for the work.

5. You give up or move onto something else.

If the feedback is discouraging or overwhelming, sometimes you just want to hide from it. And hiding from it may mean abandoning the project, either temporarily or for good.

Worse things could happen. Sometimes we’re not ready to complete the projects we start and have to return at a different time. No shame in it.

6. You ask questions.

With any piece of feedback you receive, whether positive or negative, there were a million choices that went into crafting that feedback. Some things were left unstated; some matters were not expanded upon. But they could be. Just ask, especially during moments in the feedback where you wish: “Boy, I want to know more about that.”

After discouraging feedback, a good follow-up is always: What am I doing right that I can build on? Writers build on their strengths, and you want to know what parts of your work ought to be preserved.

Let me know in the comments: What strategies have you found successful for using feedback to improve your work?

Share on:
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

45 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
trackback

Great article! I think I’ve experienced each of these reactions to critique at some point. I’d like to think age has helped in building perspective for the value of good criticism. With that, I believe the most difficult thing is finding the right person for you as an author. Your spouse, best friend, or family member is usually not the best for a valuable critique. Finding someone whose ideas you value and in return who values your work is the tough part. Any recommendations for this?

Finn McDonagh

Thank you! Great suggestions. Your blog is a great find. I look forward to reading. Thanks again!

JeffO

I try largely to stick to #4–sitting on feedback–and really giving it consideration before acting. I will ask questions if I don’t understand something or need more clarity.

Lyn Alexander

Some of the worst criticism had led to some of my best re-writing. I mourn the loss of my editor who succumbed to the stresses of publishing and has retired.

Ann Jerzowski

For the most part I enjoy my local Creative Writers group at a nearby library. We meet twice a month and some of the participants are published. The comments seem to have become a little more harsh recently about my work. The group seems to be focusing on one theme: “you must have conflict in every scene.” I think I may need a clearer explanation of what qualifies as “conflict.”

Carmen Amato

It is always best to sleep on feedback and revisit to see if the criticism will help you touch your target audience. If the criticism is coming from those who are not your intended readers and might not know your genre, take it with a grain of salt.

Holly

These are interesting responses to me because not all of them are bad instincts. For example, it can be really helpful to sit back and think about critique. It can be also helpful to want to act on that critique right away. The two might need some balancing but both are helpful.

Anita Rodgers

Great post, Jane.

In the past, I think I’ve probably done all of the above. Though now, my response is to ask follow up questions. If I have a weakness in my story I want to know about it.

If I don’t understand the feedback, I ask for clarification and sometimes that shifts things enormously.

I think too, it’s important to categorize the source and type of feedback. I like to get feedback from all kinds of people. Writers, readers, friends, strangers. Each brings a different perspective and to me, that’s helpful. So certain feedback will carry more weight than others.

But I think a writer also needs to understand that none of the feedback is gospel, either. For example, I had a beta reader who just didn’t like my MC’s love interest. Though despite extensive back and forth just really couldn’t say why. I did ask the other beta readers their thoughts on the character and they didn’t seem to have a problem with him. So, I chose to keep the character but also paid more attention to him and his choices, dialogue, actions, etc to make him more believable.

Thanks for this.
Annie

Emily

“Does it have to be a whale?” This was an actual question posed to Herman Melville by a professional editor. Yes, it had to be a whale. Sometimes the writer DOES know best and this does not make him or her a “special snowflake” (can we please retire this term?). The trick is to get that balance between sticking to your guns (yes, sometimes what has been done a million times in a genre isn’t what needs to be done now) and also being open to feedback that could vastly improve a manuscript. Writers are just human and don’t always know the difference. Stepping away from the MS can help immensely. I tend to have a knee-jerk “You’re wrong” reaction, but don’t voice it. Lo and behold, those suggestions I thought were so wrong often end up being absolutely correct. But sometimes, they are still wrong. Editors too are just human, and having worked with them for two decades, some actually shouldn’t be in the business.

Emily

Great. I respect your opinion and wouldn’t dream of calling you a “snowflake” because you have one. I would hope you would give writers, the ones who actually give birth to the creative entity, the same respect.

Maria D\'Marco

To me, the exchange that happened here is an example of Jane’s post — from both sides.
Emily had a negative reaction, apparently, to a term that was used in the post. This reaction seemed to color her view of the entire post and of Jane, the writer of the post. Jane’s reaction was to take action to defuse the negative reaction.

There were assumptions made on both sides, but for different reasons. Assumptions that the use of a single term defined the entire post, and the writer of that post.

And conversely, assumptions that the use of the term was harmless to everyone.

Both parties operated on assumptions that involve some very personal views. This is the human part of our communications.

Jane may be an editor, but she also writes — a lot — and regularly. And she must take immediate actions to amend her writing to ensure that the position she’s created in the writing community through her interactions, laying her writer/editor self on the line, is authentic and accurate — and as supportive and progressive as possible.

So — as a writer/editor, I wondered how much of an obstacle my editor ‘position’ might be for some writers. I wondered how often my guidance is warped or not ‘heard’ simply because I am functioning as a perceived authority figure.

As a writer, I have had editors who simply recited rules I was breaking. I have worked with book groups where everyone spends all their time in covert and overt power plays, using my writing to ‘prove’ their opinion is the most honest, professional, educated — and confusing me in the process.

As an editor, I have had writers who are trapped by concerns over rules and following them. I have struggled to get past preconceived ideas or to explain why and how a creative block can be removed through craft actions.

Good editors operate from a tightrope, constantly attempting to balance their actions so as to be both a source of solid guidance for a writer and their work, and an agitator of sorts, so a writer retains flexibility in their writing.

I would add one idea to this post, and it’s sort of a sidebar… Reaching the end of the writing of your book takes time. Sometimes lots and lots of time. One edit will not take you there. You will/should learn about your book as you go, and you will/should learn about yourself as well.

And finally, conflict is only resolved through communication. If you disagree or don’t understand what your editor says, talk to them. Ask why they said the thing you disagree with — don’t argue or assume, just listen, and then move on. Ask them to explain more fully what they say, if you don’t understand or they use terms you aren’t (or are, see bias) familiar with and what prompted that use.

Who knows? Maybe the editor made an assumption — an innocent one, a human one. Just like the writer, who reacts by letting loose their porcupine-self , a protective, very human response.

Nice post, Jane. Thanks!

Harry

The feedback I’ve been getting for the last year or so has been positive. Friends, the editor of the one site I regularly write for, and the few anonymous reviewers who have posted comments or left reviews all seem pretty happy with my work. I received one complaint about a book being too short and a couple about books or stories being too cynical at times, but nothing constructive. I expect criticism, especially from editors, but I’m more experienced than the one I regularly write for and he’s reluctant or unable to give me any. The people who reject me don’t offer any feedback either, I’m too broke to pay for it, and writing groups haven’t worked for me. Any advice?

Barbara Strickland

My reaction these days is to take a good look at the work and the words told to me. If it changes what I want to say I ask questions as to why. Feedback at times is about what that person thinks should happen. However I take all comments seriously and concentrate on separating my feelings from the statements. Teachers are taught to separate the behaviour from the child and it makes sense here as well. With comments on the use of language, grammar and techniques I remain very open-minded and often get the second opinion. The truth is we make errors and its about fixing those and not our egos.