The Critical Fresh Pair of Eyes

Someone recently asked if I allow others to read my works in progress. I thrive on feedback, always have. However, my attitude toward, and expectations of a critique have changed considerably. Initially, I looked to feedback for encouragement. Now, I question the critique that doesn’t point out at least one problem area per section or chapter. This is especially true when working through an early draft. I want to know if I have adequately developed my characters and the plot. Does the opening paragraph pull the reader in, or does it read like a bad diary entry? Are the chapter endings page-turners or turn offs?

My argument for a critical fresh pair of eyes was recently confirmed when a fellow author read the first few chapters of my work in progress. In it, my female character is supposed to be a strong-willed individual. She is driven, spunky, and the perfect counter balance to my male protagonist. Yet the reader interpreted the character’s actions as someone who is somewhat of a scatterbrain. Shock! To make matters worse, the reader couldn’t understand the character’s motivation. A double whammy!

My first reaction was to balk. I was certain that wasn't the way I had written this character. After reading through her comments several times, I decided to study the scene again, this time from a reader’s point of view with a fresh pair of eyes. That’s when I discovered that the reader was right on target. The problem wasn’t the character though; it was me. I had been so wrapped up in recording my thoughts that my mind raced ahead of the typing. I know this character well. She is key to the plot and can’t be anything less than strong and assertive. But I had jumped ahead of myself and had not taken time to share my knowledge of the character and her motives with the reader. Fortunately, it was a relatively easy fix, but I have to wonder if I would have seen the omission without someone pointing it out to me.

I find it interesting that my attitude toward the critique has changed nearly as much as my writing. In fact, the two seem to go hand in hand. It’s all about improving the writing and the only way to do that is to accept the honest, harsh critiques. The secret is to selectively “listen” and use only the valid information. There have been times when I didn’t agree with a suggested change, but when I looked beyond the comment at what really bothered the reader, the solution often revealed amazing new ideas. Whether it was a matter of changing a few words or not, it invariably was enough to strengthen the prose and occasionally spin the scene in a different direction. That's exciting!

I may have a bit more experience now, but I’m no less sensitive or thicker-skinned than before. A harsh critique can still be as painful as a swift kick in the shins. But trial and errors have made it clear that an honest critique is the only way to improve the writing. Author Laura Hendrie wrote a piece titled: “What to Do About Criticism” in which she indicated that a writer’s first reaction to a harsh critique is to recoil and feel insulted. Some writers may stop there, but she goes on to say that, the difference between a writer who succeeds and one who fails depends less on the quality of the work than with the way he or she handles criticism.