Reviewers, or When to Stick your Fingers in your Ears.

As mentioned previously, I've been lucky enough to get feedback from a number of friends and family. Everyone makes an effort to think of something positive to say; probably because I tell them to. Nearly everyone then adds some constructive criticism.

I've found I have three responses to criticism:

1) Wow, I think I knew that myself but I hadn't verbalised it yet. Thanks - I'm off to do some rewriting!

2) Really? You think? [Do some rereading]...you're right. I can't believe I never saw that. I'm off to do some rewriting!

3) Don't agree. Reread some. Think. Still don't agree.


The response that gives me trouble is number three, because, you see, how can I be sure that I'm right? Maybe my reader has identified a profound truth about my book, but I'm just too stupid/stubborn/defensive to see it.

So how can I be sure? I don't know, but as always there's advice out there.

My font of all critiquing wisdom, Louisa Burton, tells would-be reviewers: "To properly critique a story, you must invest in that writer's vision of the story, not try to filter it through your own sensibility, to remake it into what it would be if you had written it."

In her must-read article Re-work And Edit, Barbara Trapido offers this advice to the would-be author:

"In my experience, misguided suggestions will jar with my own instincts, while valid, sensitive suggestions have a way of pointing to failings that I really knew about all the time, only I hadn't quite managed to bring them to the front of my mind. So toughen up about criticism and take all the ego-bruising. Some of it is helpful. And sometimes you'll be getting praise. Don't blow like a reed in the wind over every suggested change. It's your book. It's your project. Walk tall."

In my own experience, there are some things about the novel that I know, because I'm the author. To give a simple example: I know it's a mystery, so anyone telling me to remove the murder is just plain wrong. There are other aspects of the book's pace and tone that I'm fairly sure about. If a reviewer is telling me to change one of those, I know they just don't get that element of the book. This helps me to evaluate any of their other suggestions that feel wrong to me.

Then I send them a flame email.

Only joking.

Incidentally, I suspect that rejected criticisms lurk just under the consciousness. I probably act on them much later, and don't even realise I'm doing it.