Lately I've been reading a LOT of manuscripts, mostly critique partnering for other budding authors. (The difference between CPs and Beta readers is the subject of this post, Alpha Reader, Critique Partner and Beta Readers: What's the difference?).
I was in an in-person critique group that met for about a year and used this "Critique Note" to deliver feedback. At the time, it seemed okay. It was based on a blog post by a well-respected author, and a book about a genius team of animated storytellers, and it kinda-sorta worked.
However, it tended to devolve into the "critique sandwich," which I've always found to be absolutely useless. I know, the sandwich is widely used because it smooths over hurt writer feelings / egos. It's easier to take constructive criticism when someone's said something that makes you feel good, first. It works, but only if the author is unaware of what you're attempting to do.
Unfortunately, this really only describes true newbie writers. Once you're exposed to it, you know how to recognize it, forever after. And if the author is aware it's being used, the positive comment becomes only so much gobbledygook they don't really pay attention to because they're waiting with baited breath to hear the bad stuff, the critique that they know is coming...wait for it...as soon as I'm done praising you.... See what I mean?
So while yes, I love to hear and need to hear what's working in my own writing, what I need to work on -- as an author -- is what isn't. The "Critique Note" was supposed to focus on that, but it was waaay too narrow. I'd read a piece, overall it wouldn't work, but I'd focus on the "elements" of the note. The overall, big picture analysis was totally missing.
In my recent notes to CPs, I noticed that I ditched the Critique Note. I'm using a different, but predictable, pattern to deliver feedback and it isn't the "sandwich," either, although I do include praise (genuine) when warranted.
It looks a LOT like this model, called the RISE Model, by Emily Wray, for feedback in online (college-level) discussions. But I have to say, I LOVE it for CP-ing, too.
I'll discuss how I've tweaked it to providing feedback to critique partners.
1. Reflect. First, I make it clear to the author that I've actually taken the time to read their work and understand it.
I don't flop and flail about like a fish out of water, unwilling to put in the time and effort to understand the story. I don't gasp for editorial comprehension. I exhibit, in my comments, that I know what's going on in the story.
Believe it or not, there are CPs who will do this. They'll claim "I don't get this!" to everything, I suspect so you can't hold them responsible for doing the rest of this very hard work, while you read their MS and provide them with detailed feedback. You know you've got such a fish, when eight readers before them had no problem following the story line, even pointing multiple sub-plots in your story.
Don't worry and finish CPing for that author. You'll be a better writer for having done this a few (okay, many?) times, even if all you receive are fish-out-of-water responses from CPs of your WIP. You'll gain a greater understanding of the many ways a story can go wrong, and that's absolutely vital.
So how do I reflect on a story while CP-ing? This isn't always easy, depending on the manuscript. But quite frankly, it involves that simplest of reading and analysis tools: summarizing. I reiterate the portion I've read back to the author, and ask, "Did I get this right? Or did I miss something?"
2. Inquire. Then, because I recognize I haven't finished the full WIP yet, and I don't know all the ins and outs of the story, or what's important or not, I'll ask questions. A TON of questions.
"Is this included here for a purpose?" or "Is this a part of the plot, later on?"
I've found the more questions I ask, the better the author can respond to the overall feedback. It also gives them an idea of what I'm thinking, as I'm reading. It's a way of opening the feedback window, so to speak.
It's also a way to avoid the old adage, "When you assume, you make an a$$ of u and me." Far too many inexperienced CPs will seize on something, declare it "backstory" or "extraneous detail," not knowing it's pivotal to the author's plot, or a character's character, etc. Granted, it may not be executed well, but in the author's mind, it's KEY. And you just recommended cutting it. You look like an "a$$." You assumed something about the story and overlaid your assumption on it. Heads up: it's not your story. It's the author's story. Be respectful of the author's story.
So swallow your pride and take some time to ask the author questions, because you really don't know this story, not until you reach the end. And just by asking questions, often the author will realize, "Dang. The reader didn't 'get it.' Why didn't they 'get it'?" and realize they need to rewrite.
3. Suggest. This is exactly as the model states, although it generally looks more like this in my feedback: "X is what I'm thinking / feeling as I'm reading, right here. Do you want me thinking / feeling this -- here? Or do you want to save creating this reaction in me for later?"
As authors we're puppet masters, and you need to know what effect you're producing in me, the reader. I can take a guess at what the author's trying to create, but only the author will know how s/he intended to make the reader feel, so as you provide feedback, you have to ask -- what did you intend?
Another example of what it looks like in a feedback comment: "X comes off as kinda jerky here. Did you intend that? If so, great job. If not, you might consider softening this a bit."
Please note, I don't dictate how to achieve whatever I've suggested. I provide a suggestion, but it's up to the writer to write it, as only the writer knows his / her characters and story intimately enough, at this point in a critique, to answer this. And the answer may be, "Yes, that's exactly what I wanted you to think!"
Occasionally, I'll do this in individual scenes or chapters, generally by asking, "Could you write a scene, instead of paraphrasing what happens here? Just to see what it looks / feels like? You may not keep any of it, but it might help to write it, for setting the tone of this next bit here..."
4. Elevate. This is the absolute hardest, but it's key when providing CP feedback, and it's the note you write at the very end, after finishing the story.
Yeah, as a CP I'm tired. I've spent 1-2 weeks reading a work, providing feedback every 50 pages or so. That's a lot of summarizing, questions and suggestions (about 8-9 pages worth per 50 pages of WIP, if I'm CPing a rough MS).
BUT, at that stage, I'm absolute gold to the budding author. As a reader, I can now express what worked for me in the story and what didn't, overall. As a writer, with a few tools in my toolkit, I can now see perhaps one or two suggestions that might address that. But writing this final note takes time, because it has to show:
1) I've read the entire manuscript, and thought about it. Seriously. Hard.
2) This is where knowledge of story structure, characterizations, settings, motivations, etc. come into play. This is the big-picture stuff, the weaving of the basket of plot lines, character arcs, basic misunderstanding of the storyworld, the MC's emotional story arc and everything else in between can be seen and tweaked.
This is the feedback that we all crave for our WIPs.
It's not the sum of in-line comments in a Word or other doc. It is not grammar checking someone's WIP, line editing or proof reading. While all three are worthy edits, and must be done, that's not CPing.
When you agree to CP, I implore you, please take the time to do this final end note. Pay it forward. You'll be learning as you go, I promise, and it'll make you a stronger writer, too, by flexing those big-picture muscles.
