Everybody's a Critic - And You Can Be One Too!

My writing production this weekend primarily consisted of one literary magazine review for Becky Tuch's excellent website, The Review Review. In this review, and in previous reviews like this one, I dare to declaim to established authors about their publications (publications in magazines, let me say, that I would kidnap the editor's small children to be published in) things such as "... ultimately lacking in lasting meaning" and "...it could have been so much more." (I said some nice things, too, but nice doesn't make the headlines.)

What, other than my usual self-destructive impulses, gives me the right to say such things?

Well, because I read those writers' stories and thought about them. And then I thought about why I thought about them the way I did.

We don't all enjoy all of the stories that are published every year. This was brought home particularly well to me in the salon Ron MacLean hosted at Grub Street about the Best American Short Stories: 2009 anthology. Before each week's discussion we individually rated the night's stories as "Loved It, Hated It, or Indifferent." I don't recall a single story that didn't have at least one check mark in both the Loved It and Hated It categories. Then we spent the rest of each salon having the participants articulate Why or Why Not they felt the way they did, and reacting to each other's opinions.

The best gift you can give a fellow writer, in a workshop or in a review, is constructive criticism. But do realize that no matter how insightful you are, it's only your one opinion, and other readers may beg to differ. Note the importance of the word "constructive" there -- what I find most helpful is the explication of what is, and what isn't, working, in the story. Don't just say, "that's great" -- what was great about it? Give an example. Worse, don't say "it didn't work for me." (A.K.A. "I thought it sucked.") Tell them specifically what didn't work for you, and why, and how that element could have worked for you.

Otherwise you're just being a dick.

Which means if I really only said the story was "... ultimately lacking in lasting meaning," I'd just be being a dick.

What I actually said was: "The wandering point of view of this story gives the reader a fascinating and believable long-lens view of the gym, but makes it difficult to focus on what is happening on the floor and in the locker rooms beyond the external events – events rich in aberrant behavior, but ultimately lacking in lasting meaning." I hope that helps explain why the story in question didn't one hundred percent work for me.

It's easier to do this with someone else's work than your own, but once you get in the habit, it helps you to bring it home when you need it.

So go forth and be a critic -- but only to help.