Costructive criticism: does really anyone want it?

Hey guys, I was just wondering that I may not really know what's constructive criticism after all.
What is your definition of it?

Recently, on two occasions, I ended up censoring myself because I wanted to comment on someone's work, but ultimately asked myself: what's the point? Will that be really welcomed?
So instead I just left two really brief comments.

In one of the two cases, I was reading a comic leaked out from a paysite. (Just to make things clear, I stumbled on it, and didn't actively do anything to get it.)
I began reading and I was like "Wow, that's good, I can see how anyone could pay for this". It wasn't particularly clever or original, but the way it was portrayed really made it click the right way.
The author had really managed to catch that moment where things took a sudden erotic turn out of the blue and people do unthinkable stuff and then kind of regret it.

But the story had four chapters, and the only compelling one was the first. It had such a great and promising start, then it trailed off into a series of repeated sexual acts and wanton debauchery, one on top of the other, that got boring pretty soon. (Not to bash you, fellow U.S. forum users, but there is really no point in putting more than one or two patties into a burger, it doesn't get any juicier...)
I see this happen a lot on Chyoa too.

The characters, that after the first sketch should have been fleshed out, were handled pretty badly. One became a pure sociopath, just like that. The girl was a caricature, she did and said things, but ultimately was just a powerless toy, a beautiful prop with no impact on the plot. The last character was the worst of all, but admittedly it was probably the hardest to write too.

In the end, I was like "meh, could have been better". But the effect of the first chapter was still lingering and I felt like commenting.
And then I got thinking: what could I say to this guy that isn't just a dull praise and that could possibly help him improve?

Eventually, I concluded the answer was nothing. The author created that story on commission or maybe adhering to some recommendations straight from the site.
I doubt he couldn't see how dull and repetitive his story was after the first chapter, but he got paid for it, so good for him/her.
He is a professional and I'm not, he has probably better insight on what he's doing than me and his best feedback is the money rolling in.

I think I lost my point, somewhere...

Anyhow, what do you consider to be constructive criticism?
It is all just about the tone of the comment?
Is anything that's not simply "I don't like it" constructive criticism?
Does it need to be technical?

 

Since part of your question seems to be about how feedback will be received: I believe that the way in which one phrases their criticism will make a lot of difference in how it is interpreted (and also in how constructive it ends up being). Starting off with something positive generally already softens the blow inherent with any kind of feedback (and is a good practice in general) and makes people more likely to value your opinion too. And this shouldn't even be too hard. After all, the reason someone provides constructive criticism is likely because they want to help something improve, which implies that they care about it in the first place.

That's not to say you have to say something positive, of course. But different people react differently to criticism, and this way even if they disregard it altogether you'll be far less likely to accidentally demotivate or offend anyone.

 

Constructive involves clearly explaining your reasoning behind the fault.

If it was a commission for someone else, it might be a bit pointless to say anything. That said, some constructive criticism could still help the with future projects they might have.

If he pulls that card, he's not a professional. Part of being a professional is being able to take criticism.

Of course, there are those who simply can't take criticism. With those people, it won't matter how you go about because they'll either hide behind "I meant to do thats" or accuse you of something ridiculous like "misreading"/bullying/harassing/being the same person as someone else who made a similar criticism/being a bot. You can't help those kinds of people.

Ultimately, it is on the artists themselves.

 

Constructive criticism has two key elements:
1) It's not personal, the criticism is limited to the work being discussed. It doesn't have to be positive ("I love your work, but...") but it should not be negative ("This writing sucks."). This may be as simple as making the work itself the subject of the sentences evaluating it: "The chapter doesn't do an effective job developing Joe's motive." vs. "You didn't do an effective job..." Some people may take it personally anyway, but you can't control someone else's reaction.
2) It explains clearly why you're offering the criticism and ideally helps them resolve it. "The chapter doesn't do an effective job developing Joe's motive because he has no thoughts, dialogue, or actions indicating why he decides to cheat on his wife."

 

I'd say only give it if someone asks for it.

 

When it comes to criticism, I think the tone you go with needs to be fit for the situation. I assume that most writers on Chyoa are relatively amateur at actual story writing, so criticising harshly is more likely to demotivate them and scare them off. This is also why I think adding in positive feedback is so important; not only does it take the sting off the criticism, but it can also help bolster confidence in the writer and let them understand what they're doing right. I'd go so far as to argue that emphasising the positive is probably more important for those who simply write as a hobby; it lets the writer know their work is appreciated, and is more likely to make them continue.

But criticism is still good to bring up, and for me, I find a good criticism is one that's explained well. Criticism is made better if you can explain what the issue is, what it does to the story, where it comes up, etc. I also find that adding in suggestions for improvements or changes helps immensely here as well. If someone's characters are written poorly, what can the writer do to improve them? Doing this may also help you with your own writing, if you're a writer yourself.

 

My #1 advice is: don't try to come up with solutions. You're not the author, they are, and they almost certainly understand their own story better than you do. After all, you only read it the one time, while they spent countless hours plotting, writing, editing, and reviewing. I'd even say that trying to point out what you think the flaws in the story are might be a step too far, because again, no one better understands what they were aiming for than they do. After all, maybe you were meant to be annoyed by the obstinately childish bad guy! (hi there, Kylo Ren!)

In my opinion, the absolute very best thing you can do is describe how the story made you feel. "During the fight scene in chapter 3, I got lost in the details and didn't really understand what was going on". "I got a little bored of the sex scenes between Alice and Bob in the second half of the story". "I had a hard time keeping the cast of secondary characters apart". "The way the story switches back and forth between two parties on different sides of the world made it hard for me to follow either half of the plot".

Some of those things could be unintentional flaws, while others could be deliberately designed but not entirely clear. Maybe the protagonist gets drugged during the fight, and the disorienting prose is an attempt at conveying that they feel muddled and confused, but the drugging is a little unclear and that's what's throwing you off. Maybe Alice and Bob are getting tired of each other, and the sex scenes are intentionally written in much the same way as an attempt to foreshadow that.

Once the author knows how their work made you (and others) feel, they are usually entirely capable of deciding whether and how to improve parts of the story. If they want to hear your ideas, they can ask for it.

(Do I always follow my own advice? Definitely not! I'm bad and I feel bad.)

This post brought to you by my ability to repeat this video verbatim:

 

Constructive criticism implies you want to influence/improve the author's future work. In that case, you need to provide enough information that they can learn from the criticism, and present it in a non-hostile format so that the author doesn't just tune you out.

Simply being polite is not enough. Honestly, saying "great story" is no more useful than saying "fuck you, this is garbage." They're both just thumbs up/down data points, unless you add more.

However, being positive is important because A) you want to not get tossed into the "troll" bin and ignored, and B) I assume you want to encourage them to write more, and positive feedback does that.

 

Constructive criticism focuses on how a writer might improve a work, not necessarily what you like or don't like about it, or why it is bad or terrible. Critique doesn't have to be negative, even if you don't personally hold to the author's fetish, nor do you have to give the author complimentary oral sex just because you like their writing. The point is that you're talking to the author, not reviewing it for a wider audience; you want to speak specifically to their strengths and weaknesses, but not in a way that puts them down.

[/edit]

Marcie and Gina read CHYOA might be a good way to illustrate the difference between styles of criticism. @Gambio typically plays for laugh, doing harsh, riff-trax style critiques which are over-the-top and emotional; an author might get some insight out of it, but the style is that of a roast, not constructive criticism. My reviews in that story tend to be less focused on "you wrote something bad and you should feel bad" and try to be more balanced, but again, the point is as much to entertain as it is to provide feedback to the author.

Good constructive criticism needn't be dry and technical, but ideally you should be able to pick out examples of what you're talking about from the text, be able to explain what you think might be improved, and perhaps offer up a counter-example of how it might be written.

 

Some constructive criticism for Iwannaspankgirls - your signature strip is too big!

 

How dare you. Marcie and Gina are utterly fair and infallible.

Of course these people all applied for it, but it surprises me that after a year and a half we are still going strong. There is definitely a market out there for very harsh criticism.

I think people in general love feedback. Especially when said feedback is long. It means you engaged with the story and at the very least you cared enough to leave such a comment.

I think the key is writing the criticism in good faith. Usually authors can tell if you genuinely want to help or are just here to bitch.

 

answering the quesiton - to be honest I'd rather everyone just lied and told me my work was great and they all loved me.

 

I liked your post, but now you'll never know why, not for sure.

 

Constructive criticism is, by definition, criticism that is useful and beneficial. It is distinct from non-constructive criticism, which is not useful or beneficial, and instead usually exists as an emotional outlet for the critic. A piece of criticism is constructive if and only if it serves a beneficial purpose, so constructive criticism, I think, must be these three things:

1. Actionable
2. Correct
3. Communicated effectively, so that the writer may take it seriously.

An example of criticism that is actionable and correct, but not communicated effectively: "My eyes are bleeding. Your grammar is shit and your characters are like cardboard cutouts. This story makes me want to kill myself. Fuck you."

Actionable and communicated effectively, but not correct: "I really like this story but all the paragraph breaks are distracting. I would recommend restructuring it so that all of the writing is in one big block of text."

Correct and communicated effectively, but not actionable: "The story is great, but I'm having trouble visualising the sex scenes. You should figure out a way to beam videos of the scene directly into my brain."

A common mistake, I find, is assuming that just because something is physically possible, it must be actionable. However, it must also be reasonable, practical and valuable. For example, on a story about sexy clowns from outer space, you might say, "I can see you have passion, but a story about sexy clowns from outer space won't get any attention on this site. You should delete this and try something more sane and palatable." However true that statement may be, demanding the destruction of a story clearly does not serve to improve that story. It is not advice the author can practically take action on, because the cost is the death of the story, so it is not actionable.

Another common mistake is treating correctness as the end goal, rather than a prerequisite for giving constructive criticism, which also has the other aforementioned considerations. It might seem like being exact, sharing knowledge or telling the truth are the most important things to achieve with criticism, but they're all irrelevant if the recipient isn't going to take you seriously, or can't reasonably do anything about that information. It can be tempting to show off how clever and analytical you are, especially if you are, in fact, a much better writer, but technical ability is only one side of the coin. The other is social awareness. If you want your criticism to achieve something - especially to improve the story - you will need to form a compromise.

All that said, note that these ideas leave a great deal of wiggle room. It is acceptable to be blunt in certain situations, especially when someone is explicitly requesting criticism. You're not really obligated to elaborate on your commentary if what you're saying is true and considerate; you're not debating the writer. I could even envision cases where it would be appropriate to address the author personally, if you repeatedly notice a bad habit in all of their writings, and are sufficiently polite about it.

 

Thats fine - I'll take it! Like Sally Field at an awards ceremony. "You like me!"

 

Those examples sound like the author is trying to pass a mistake off as a planned move. If they wanted to convey feeling muddled and confused, he could just say, "the protagonist felt muddled and confused." And who intentionally writes a sex scene badly?

Oh, okay, I see your point. I've removed the upcoming stuff from it.

edit: Actually, it still seems a bit big.

 

Try something like this.

 

They could have, yes, and maybe the fact that they didn't is a mistake, or maybe it's a conscious choice that just needs to be worked out better to reach its full potential. Either way, the feedback "this made me feel confused about what was going on" is all the information the author needs. If they meant for you to be confused, they'll know they've made the right choice (though maybe the intent could be clarified? Does that make sense?). If they didn't, they'll know they need to do a major rewrite. A reviewer's opinion on what someone else's story should be like is, at best, irrelevant. The best thing they can do is let the author know how the story made them feel, and they'll be able to figure out what to do with it.

Admittedly, that does assume both parties are possessed of some basic level of competence. As an extreme example, pointing out that a story is full of spelling mistakes and grammatical errors and run-on sentences is obviously always valid and worth doing... except, of course, if you're reviewing Finnegans Wake. See what I mean? If even the most basic fundamentals of language are a mere suggestion, who's to say what's a mistake and what's literary genius?

I didn't say they were badly written, I said that the reviewer got a little bored of them. Those are very, very different things.

 

That is famously not considered an effective way of conveying a character's emotions...

 

In theory, it could be fun to intentionally write a story badly. I suspect that, if done well (ironic phrasing detected), it would probably come off as cheesy parody.