Concrit Guidance

[morbane]

Several people suggested we have a post about what concrit means here and how to do it. I think that's a great idea. Suggest links and I'll add them.


A concrit approach
These thoughts aren't new or original, but since I'm hosting this space, how I personally aim to approach constructive criticism seems like relevant information. Hope it's useful!


If you want tips on giving constructive criticism, please read this as a basic guide.

If you're confident in giving constructive criticism, please read this so you can tell me how your approach differs, or what I've left out.

1. Avoid giving constructive criticism to something you don't like at all. Be careful giving concrit to something that you would love only if it kept your favourite part and changed everything else. In this event, if you start hating a story as you go through it, take a break or ask to be matched with something else.


2. Note your own first reactions and gut feelings. They're valuable. If you can describe them, it's even better. Maybe you find out, as you read, that a first impression was wrong. Maybe you decide that an author set up one impression only to subvert it later. In either case, your reaction and how it changed could be useful information to the author.


3. Try to keep the piece in mind as a whole. Sparse descriptions can be atmospheric or evoke a character's disorientation; lush descriptions can evoke a slow, relaxed pace. If the author seems to portray a character in a confusing way, that might be a deliberate choice to help you relate to a different character. If a specific thing were changed, would a different thing have less of an effect?


4. Pay attention to the parts that bore you or that are difficult to understand. Note which parts you love; note which parts are easy to understand but tempt you to skim them because you don't care about the detail. Depending on what your author has asked you to focus on, these impressions may not be what the author's looking for, or useful without some further framing, but they will be useful for you to reflect on when finishing up your feedback.


5. Consider characters and settings as specific aspects. Why did you think the characters acted the way they did? Did the motivations, or the characters' ways of expressing themselves, seem consistent? If a room or a similar space was described, was it easy to imagine the layout and how characters or objects moved in that space? As with 4., your initial notes on this may not be what your author is primarily looking for in feedback, but they may be helpful when you want to explain your reaction to something else.


6. What are you reminded of? Does a piece call to mind specific genres, or other specific stories? Does this feel like horror, or humor? Why? Your author may be interested to know about specific comparisons you thought of when reading. It may also be useful for them to know about places where you felt the tone or genres changed.


7. AFTER larger points, consider grammatical and sentence-level suggestions. You might have cited some grammatical points already to explain earlier thoughts, but when giving constructive criticism, notes on grammar are better as supporting points than as main points.
   
   If talking about grammar and style, the more specific you can be, the better. "Over-description" is most helpful when you explain what parts felt over-described. Sometimes, what a reader sees as a strict grammar rule is different or more flexible in a different dialect - again, being specific about what you know and where you're coming from helps the author to figure out if your grammar notes apply to them or not.
   
   You don't need to have strong grammar skills to give good constructive criticism. The most valuable skill is the ability to describe your own expectations and reactions: in detail, and in sympathy with what you think the author is trying to achieve.
   
   Concrit isn't just about making a specific piece better, as it might be in a beta job, but about raising overall points for an author to think about. If suggesting alternative phrasings, keep in mind that your author is unlikely to change a published story.

If your author has specific concerns or questions, and you're not sure how to address them, start smaller rather than going big. If, for example, they have asked you about whether a description of a character works, and you're not able to give anything beyond a first impression, perhaps concentrating on one detail of the character description, and thinking about how that might link to the rest of the piece, would be a way to address their question usefully even if you don't feel like you're addressing all possible aspects of it.

Describing what you like is also a constructive critical response. Saying what worked isn't just encouraging, but gives authors more tools to understand what will work in future as well as what didn't work. It helps people avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater and build on their strengths.

---

FURTHER LINKS
Two classic posts on how to beta, with additional commentary:
1
2

"A Short Guide to Critique", recently put together by TKodami. Includes several examples and tips for finding extra resources to support points.


Thanks to asuralucier, Sassy_Snowperson, TKodami, Shaded_Topaz, and various people for suggestions!

Comments

[thenewbuzwuzz]

Nice, thank you!