More Lessons From Shark Tank (and other reality tv shows)

I have talked about Shark Tank here in the past and I want to bring up something I often see on this show, as well as some of those competitive cooking shows and then to extend this to what we often see from writers when working with editors and agents.

Every now and then, as we watch these shows, we see people who get rejected by the Sharks or eliminated from the competition. For many they are pretty humble about this and walk away saying they learned a lot from the experience and are planning to use what they have learned for future projects. However, there are always those few who make comments as they walk away about how "they will just prove those Sharks wrong" or how "They know what they do works and is the right thing." This is where the problems lies.

When these people come to these shows, they are coming there to get feedback from "the experts." These are people who have been successful with what they do and know what they are talking about. If those Sharks or judges said something did not work or was not going to be successful, there was a reason for it. This was not an issue of people "just not getting it" or someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. Remember, these are the experts.

Every now and them as an agent, I get a response back from an writer that I rejected who intends on telling me that I was completely wrong and that I will be proven wrong when they make millions of dollars from the book I rejected. I just passed on a writer just recently who submitted a story that was not romance or women's fiction. The author still proceeded to write back to tell me I clearly did not understand why the book was perfect and why I needed to sign it. Arguing is not the best approach.

I have even heard authors at writing conferences telling me the reason they were self-publishing their books is because the traditional publishers clearly didn't know what they were doing. Let' think about that comment for a minute? Really?

I also work with other companies providing reviews and critiques for authors. Even in these situations, we hear authors, after not getting the information they wanted to hear, proceed to argue that the specialist, who they went to in the first place, just doesn't know what they are doing.

This is a business where getting feedback is a a part of the process. Sometimes, the feedback we get might be different, or simply not what we want to hear. This does not mean it is wrong.

When I talk to authors about moving to being a professional writer, I often ask them if they can handle the fact that people may not like your work, or may give you negative feedback. Can you handle the pressure? Can you handle the truth? It is easy to say yes, but look deep inside. If not, this may not be the place for you!

All Critique Partners Are Not Created Equal

I wrote, just recently, about the need for authors having outside assistance with their writing. Obviously one of the best approaches an author can take is to rally together a few other authors and create a critique group. You now have a network you can send those rough drafts to, a group you can commiserate with when you get those rejection letters, and on weekends, a social group to drink with (OK maybe not but you get the idea).

Before you dive into this, I want you to really think this through. As the title of this post suggests, all critique partners are NOT created equal. In fact, I have seen a lot of authors ruined, or their writing completely sent off track by bad critique groups. It isn't that these groups are out to ruin other authors, and these are not cases where we hear of critique partners "stealing" other authors writing. This is simply wasted time and bad advice.

Consider first the experience level of the people in the group. If all the members of your group are beginners and you are all trying to figure things out together, then you end up with a case of the blind leading the blind. This is certainly not going to help you. If you don't know what goes into a synopsis, asking others who are in the same boat with you will certainly not get you anything.

This also goes for things such as grammar, structure, plotting and so forth. I don't care if the other authors have "good intentions" simply relying on your source books to get the advice is not going to help. You need people who understand how to write.

There is a leadership model I use a lot when talking about cooperative learning situations. This comes from the Scouting program called WOODBADGE. The competency is KNOWING AND USING THE RESOURCES OF THE GROUP. In the case of critique groups or critique partners, before you start committing to working together, take the time to assess what each group brings to the table. Find a well rounded group that can help out everyone. I would also add that even if your best friend wants to work together, don't commit yet. Maybe this is not one of those situations where you want to mix business with pleasure. Keep the friendship and find someone else.

Now we come to the aspect of the social side of critique groups. This is a WORKING group. Yes, you can have fun together, and yes, you can certainly have snacks, drinks and so forth when you are working, but the focus has to be on work. If you block out one day a month to get together for critiques, and you leave with nothing accomplished other than a full stomach and a pile of new gossip, this is not worth it! If your group or the person you are looking at for a critique partner is more of a social butterfly, skip this person or group and move on.

Finally, because this is a professional working group, you have to establish the rules for your critique group. This can include things such as when manuscripts will be submitted for critiques, how much time each person gets to provide feedback, how it is to be sent (email, snail mail, etc.). Now here is the thing. If the person you are looking at for a critique partner has terrible follow through. In other words, this person will always have a personal problem, or something is always coming up, or they think on time is an hour late, then skip on this person.

There are a lot of people who really do want to help you with your writing. Keep them around for that positive feedback, but when you need someone to really help you, take the time to shop around. You may end up finding that, for a while, you are on your own. That's ok. Getting the bad advice will certainly send you in the wrong direction and you don't want that.

Critiques And Reviews Are Not All Sunshine And Rainbows

Writers are really interesting when it comes to critiques and reviews. We hear them go on and on about how they want feedback for their stories, but when they get the feedback, what we really see is that they only wanted someone to give them comments of all the things they did well and don't you dare say anything negative. When it comes to reviews, they immediately discount the negative reviews as being written by someone who was "a complete idiot" and rave about the positive reviews acknowledging the amazing genius of the reviewer.

I did a critique of a partial for a writer several months ago. This project was in really bad shape. I am assuming that this was really a first draft (or at least I hope it was). In any case,  I really worked over the manuscript highlighting all of the issues that needed to be fixed. In reality, the bigger priority was to deal with the major issues and not focus in on small things such as "It was good to see you had the point of views consistent." The comments were something that most editors would have given to revisions "if they saw potential in the project".

The result??? The author was upset. Because it was all about things that had to be fixed and not about the things that were good. Yes, were there things that were OK (please not the word...I did not say good or amazing), but token compliments are not going to make this author's writing better.

Authors are always saying they want the truth about their projects. In reality, I am starting to see that people really don't want to hear it. Yes, it hurts if things are not going the way you planned, but if someone doesn't point those things out to you, I can promise you, there will be NO improvements. Think of Col. Nathan Jessup (we can always count on Jack for these lines) from A FEW GOOD MEN...

The deal is that critiques and reviews do provide, at some level, "the truth". This is what someone saw in your writing. Just because the person doesn't think the way you do, does not mean they are wrong. It is a perspective that you need to consider.

When we provide critiques, there are going to be times when the story, synopsis or query letter is not quite right. To make improvements, we need to know what we did wrong. We cannot be expected to improve if all we get are comments such as "I really liked that phrasing." In the end, if the phrasing in part of the manuscript is good, but the rest of the project is really in need of improvement, writers have to hear the bad stuff. 

In many ways, this is really a huge issue many critique groups have. Because they are all friends outside of the critique group, the comments on projects are often tamed down a lot. The true quality of the project is not always discussed for fear of hurting the feelings of the other writer.

Being a writer is tough. To be successful takes amazingly tough skin. If this is something you don't have and you are amazingly sensitive to anything less than a glowing review of everything you do, then this might not be the business for you.

I don't want you to walk away from this thinking one person's view is correct. But please understand that sometimes, the comments you get on a book are not going to be good. I don't care how much hard work you put into it, the story might simply SUCK!

So deal with it.
Learn from it.
Fix it.
...and move on.

But do not spend the time complaining that someone hated you. Remember that you ASKED that person to look at your work. "Do you want the truth??" Can  you "handle the truth??"

Open Communication In Critiques

Getting feedback from someone else regarding your project is essential. Too often, we spend so much time in front of our computer, we start to write with blinders on and can't see the mistakes we are making. But, getting poor feedback from someone is going to be equally as bad for an author. The key to making the critique successful is open communication on the part of BOTH people.

For the person doing the critique, worrying how the person will feel if you told them truth is worse than telling them their writing is a piece of "you know what." Leading them on and giving them the image that what they have done is fine will only lead to problems down the line when they start submitting works to the editors and agents and the rejections roll in. Up until that point, everyone "loved the writing." Except, the reality is that they weren't coming out and telling the person the truth.

There is a second level here that we need to acknowledge, and this applies to many of the contests writers enter. The person providing the critique needs to be honest of his or her capabilities. I have mentioned this before in an earlier post, but would you take your car to a plumber to be fixed? Probably not. The same goes for getting feedback. If the person you are getting the feedback from is struggling to get published, or maybe even write a quality story on their part, are they the best for getting feedback for your story? Probably not! The key is the person doing the critique needs to know his or her strengths and weaknesses. Focus the critiques on what they are good at and limit the critiques of what they are weak at.

But the open communication issue also applies to the writer. If you send your story in for feedback, it is beyond crucial to focus in on what YOU need the help with. Just saying "tell me what you think" can potentially lead to making changes in places you didn't need or what. One of my Greyhaus authors is really good with that. "Hey Scott, when you take a look at this, can you just make sure the GMC of the heroine is coming through in chapters 1-6." Making a statement like this prevents me from making plot changes or other suggestions that might not work with the outlined story she had going.

Critique is good. Feedback is necessary. But, if what you get is sending you in the wrong direction, then you have problems.

Your Critique Partners May Be Holding You Back

Writers need external readers. This is a pretty much accepted thought in the publishing world for the simple fact that when we write, we do so with blinders on. We can only see things one way and that outside perspective is often what it takes to get you on the right track. But, could it be that your critique partners, those people there to get you on the right track, might be steering you in the wrong directions? If you are finding that you are doing everything that they think is good, and yet your career is constantly hitting a brick wall, the odds are you are not getting the help you need.

One of the things I have found after visiting a lot of different writing chapters around the nation is how the chapters with great authors continue to produce great authors. On the other hand, the chapters with new authors or those still struggling to get that first call, continue to grow the same type of author. This has to do with the group and the help the group is providing to one another. What we are dealing with here are "closed systems." Even though the definition is often associated with thermodynamics, I think you can see the problem. A closed system is defined as:

a region that is isolated from its surroundings by a boundary that admits no transfer of matter or energy across it.

One issue I see a lot with submissions is an extensive amount of back story to "justify" the behaviors or the actions of the characters. In other words, to provide the rationale for why the hero acts the way he does, or why the heroine isn't getting involved with a relationship, the author has added this complex, and often cumbersome story line. What is interesting, is when I do talk to the authors as to why they did this, the answer is the same the majority of the time. "My critique partners told me I had to have a reason for him doing this."

If you are picking critique partners, or assessing the critique partners you are working with, you need to think about why you are putting these people in charge of your "prized manuscript." Are you doing this because they are part of your writing chapter and also in need of a critique partner, or are you doing this because you each have something to provide to the working relationship.

Think of it this way... If your car is broken, do you take it to a plumber? Do you take it to Uncle Billy Bob with the car on the blocks who says he can fix anything? Probably not. You take it to the mechanic who has a reputation for good work and who knows what the heck he is doing.

You should be doing the same thing when it comes to finding a critique partner. Your friends, or the people in your writing chapter might have great intentions and really want to help you, but if they are only going to lead you down the wrong path, or keep you at the level you are at right now, this is not going to help you.

Don't get me wrong here. These are good people and there is nothing wrong with getting some feedback from them, but when it comes to the in-depth critiques you are looking for, find people who know what the heck they are doing.

This will take time so don't rush the process. You might find people within those online groups. You might find people in other genres. That's fine. Just start digging.

Is Your Mechanic Editing Your Manuscript?

When I teach any writing class, I always ask the participants to raise their hands if their are either poor spellers or pathetic at grammar. I then follow it up by telling people to look around and remember these people. Authors should not go to these people for help in those areas. After a few laughs, I then explain.

When your car is broken, do you take it to a plummer? The odds are you don't, or at least I hope that you don't take your car there! If you want your car in great working order, you find the best of the best and someone who you can trust. The same goes for writing.

Unfortunately, for far too many authors out there, they are taking their writing to their mechanics and plummers. The advice they are getting from their critique partners, those supposedly trained individuals teaching those sessions on line and at conferences, in many cases, are far from trained to be handing out advice.

Now, don't get me wrong on this analogy, but I think this works fairly well. Toastmasters is an organization that allows people to learn how to work with public speaking. Generally meeting at a local restaurant or library, they get together monthly to give speeches and critique each other. While the intent of this program is great, I have seen far too many of these programs with people who really don't know how to create an effective presentation, handing out advice to other individuals. Again, I love the idea behind Toastmasters, but you have to be careful.

As a writer, I cannot stress enough to make sure you do a true background check on that person who you are going to for advice. They may say they are published, but what type of publishing did they do? Did they have any training? You know the list.

As conference coordinators, do you really do background checks on who you are putting into those workshops? Sure, they might have a great session idea. They might even have fantastic handouts. But when they claim they are published, how long have they been published? Where have they been published? You might surprise yourself here but you may be sending a mechanic into the room to help out those writers who paid a great deal of money to attend your conference.

Now, can you still get advice from your mechanic? Sure. But make sure they type of questions you are asking and keep it focused. And, more importantly, don't go trusting your whole writing career on that person's comments. You might be in for a world of hurt!

Scott

You Cannot Buy Quality Writing

I am always amazed at the number of authors out there that will include in their email the comments from the professional free-lance editor who worked over the manuscript I am reading. For many authors, there is a belief that "paying" someone to edit the work for them will somehow make the work amazing. I am sorry to say this, but this is not going to produce quality writing.

As someone who does free-lance critiques, I know that I can only provide so much help to a writer. The same goes for the editors and agents out there that send revision letters for submissions and new proposals. We can only do so much for the writer. In the end, it is up to the writer to "pull the trigger" and execute those changes successfully.

Along the same lines, quality writing starts with a great premise and concept. Again, I see a lot of projects that, regardless of the amount of time we work with dialogue, narration and so forth, the premise is something that will simply not get the writer very far. In reality, the writing is simply C level writing and we cannot do much more beyond this.

I would also have to add that paying for these external critiques is only as good as who you are paying. Read any writing magazine and there are a ton of writers out there offering "critique/editing" services. But do we know anything about their ability to really help? Do we know anything about what they will do for you? For example, I have seen an advertisement for editing services from one particular author. The add makes things sound really good. However, when you research who this person is, they have only produced two books in their career and those came over 10 years ago. You also have to add in the fact that this author hasn't done anything since that time. This should make you question.

The key thing to remember is, consider what you are paying for. Also, you have to consider the quality of your writing before you send it in.

Scott

Sorry To Say This But Critiques and Reviews Are Not Always Warm Fuzzies

While I do believe we all know this in the back of our head, and while I might be stating the obvious, this is a good thing to be reminded of. Critiques are not always warm fuzzies. Reviews might not say what you want, but that IS the nature of this business.

I always find it interesting (although I understand why people do this) that when a writer receives a critique that tells them the story is great, then apparently it is the truth. But when something bad comes in, when the critique is less than perfect, apparently the reviewer had absolutely no idea what they were talking about. Obviously the same goes for reviews.

I bring this up because I have had in the past, situations when I have provided critique for a story that is far from great. There were a lot of issues and things that needed to get fixed. So I told the writer. Unfortunately, the truth hurt and I was bombarded with an amazing number of emails and criticisms of every reason I was wrong. Probably not the right approach to take.

I will say that maybe I was in the minority of the criticism. That doesn't mean that the comments I made were not justifiable. Now don't get me wrong, I am not simply justifying the idea that if an editor or agent tells you something, it is automatically correct. All I am saying is that a writer needs to listen to those comments.

I guess the last thing to consider here is another simple truth. You have to have a thick skin to be in this business. You will not always be able to crank out a 5 star book EVERY time. You will write garbage. We don't want to, but we will. Deal with it. Learn from it. And please, move on. Don't spend the time blaming the messenger.

Writing Cannot Be Strictly An Independent Activity

Being a writer is a lonely life. Writers are often found sitting quietly in some corner of a coffee shop or hidden away in their cluttered office writing furiously on their stories. During these moments, the only people interrupting their thoughts are their characters each fighting for the right to have their stories told. Ahh, the creative process.

But, with all of that independent time, writers have to face the fact that their writing has to be seen by other people. Finding the right person, however, is often a difficult task.

Critique partners and critique groups are vital to the success of any writer wishing to be successful in this business. Unfortunately, too often writers end up pairing up with simply the wrong people to review their work. Here are some key flaws:

• Relying on random reviewers from the internet. While I understand that many feel the internet is a viable alternative when they are unable to pair up with people face to face, this is really a weak method. We honestly have no idea who these other people are that are commenting on your work. I guess this is one of the reasons why I haven't found someone yet with a story I want to sign, who has worked with some of those online writing forums. In these cases, I'm talking about those sites where you post things like blogs to elicit feedback.
• Working with writers that aren't experienced. While finding people who are published to be your CP would be great, it isn't always possible. Still, if you find someone who doesn't show any ability with their style of writing to be published, you might want to reconsider if this is the parternship you want. Listen to their approach to the business. This should tell you a lot.
• Working with friends. Yes, you can work friends, but too often, writers who work with friends end up being not so reliable when it comes to critique. Since the friendship is so important, the honesty about the stories may not be there when you need it. Remember that when doing your critiques, the frienship has to be put on the back burner.
• Working with people who only write what you write. This one is simple. If you see your story from your genre, and then you have someone else who sees it in the same way because they write in that style, you will both be reading with blinders on. Bringing in outside eyes and perspectives will always yield some new ideas that you would never have seen.

This is just a few things to consider, but I think these are vital. Feedback is great, but bad feedback will never help you.

Have a great weekend.

Scott

A Lot of Critique is GREAT! If it all is in sync...

Part of the writing process is getting feedback. It is this feedback that gives a writer a new perspective on his or her story. For many writers, this feedback comes from their critique partners or critique groups. For other writers, the feedback comes from contests they enter or outside critiques. It really doesn't matter where you get it from, it is all good.

Sort of...

The biggest drawback all of this critique can have is trying to meet the needs of ALL of the readers. In other words, a writer simply tries to accomplish what everyone has said in the critiques and the end result is a tangled mess of a story. Let me explain.

Writers fail to look at the big picture of things. They get feedback from two different people on one select scene or group of chapters. Instead of taking all of the comments and looking at the issues as a whole, they work with one person at a time. While on the surface, this might seem like a completely logical approach to the revisions, they could run into contradictory issues. What the writer fails to see is that each of the critique partners were seeing the story in a different light and certainly seeing the outcome differently. They were focusing on techniques that would take the story to THEIR ending.

Think of this as if you were cooking. Someone comes over and tastes the soup you have in the pot. Someone might say that it needs some sugar to enhance the flavor. Someone else might encourage you to add another spice or a vegi and someone else might recommend taking something out. The end result could be a mess that isn't even edible. All that you have accomplished is to follow the suggestions of all of your critics without thinking of how it would all fit together.

This is one of the biggest issues I have with writers who enter a ton of contests. While they might think they are getting all of these great comments (which they might be) they are also dragging the story back and forth in different directions because many of the comments might be focusing on different factors that simply don't work together.

The solution is simple. THINK!

Scott

Take Your Story For A Test Spin

I started thinking about this one a while ago, as I read a submission from someone that said they had been working on their manuscript for 6 years. Now first of all, don't get me started on the 6 year thing. That is a story and a blog post for another day. I want to take this to a completely different angle. As I read this writer's story, I really questioned why they would waste his or her (see how I keep this a neutral) time on this project that never, in this lifetime or the next would ever get published. No, this wasn't one of those long shots that might get published. It was downright awful. I wanted to scream. Didn't someone tell you this was bad from the beginning? Obviously not.

So the question I had was simple - When do you take your story for a test spin? When is it that you get some feedback on the project to see if it has what it takes to "make the cut?"

In my humble opinion, the answer is the moment you get the concept in your head. Not after you start writing it. Not half way through it. Not when it is finished. Before you start. Of course, this does link into my continual argument for plotting not flying by the seats of your pants, but you already know my approach on that one. It is crucial that you get some feedback early on, before you waste a lot of time on a project that will fail.

I know that some of you that follow this blog say that there is no wasted writing, and for the most part, I do agree. Sometimes you have to flush that garbage out of your system before you get to the good stuff. Still, unless you have unlimited time to write, your time is precious and you need to use it wisely.

Published authors already get to experience this when they begin drafting proposals for new projects. They contact their agent, they talk to their editor and discuss different ideas they have for projects. The idea is to find the write story for the market right now. Unpublished authors can do the same thing and unfortunately, fail to do so.

That advance talking that you do with other writers or friends is a chance for you to not only see what they would like to see in a book, but also a chance for you to start fleshing out the idea before you dive into the project. During these discussions, you may find a better direction to take your story, the readers may provide you some answers to points you have been struggling with. Simply put, there are a lot of great things you can get from this.

The next point I would recommend getting the feedback is after you have the first three or so chapters. This is where those contests come into play. I have to stress, there are a lot of times that contests don't provide you the right type of feedback due to who is reading your project in the preliminary rounds; but, with that said, sometime you do get some interesting comments. Send it out and see what people outside of your critique circle have to say. Send it to a couple of contests and look for patterns. If you see the same comments from a couple of people, that should tell you something.

I think what I want you to get out of this is get feedback and get it early on. If you wait until the project is too far along, it will take forever to fix the problems. Overhauling a partial is easy, the full manuscripts are tough. (Got it Leslie).

Have a great day and write well.

Scott

The Truth May Hurt

I have always loved Jack's line from A FEW GOOD MEN! "You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!" It is amazing how often, when I bring up this point, writers will always scream to me, "but we love when people tell us the truth." That is, until the truth smacks them in the face.

Writing is a tough business to be in. Not simply because of the number of writers out there competing for the small number of places on the book shelves, but because of what goes into the stories. Think about it. Writers sit for hours at their computers, pouring their hearts and souls into those words. The tireless hours editing. The waiting for a response just to get:

Thank you so much for giving us a chance to read your story, but it isn't strong enough...

Guess what? Sometimes the writing isn't strong enough. Sometimes the editors and agents are really looking for that extra special something. And yes, sometimes, your writing might not be that good.

I often think of writing like cooking. You may be a really good cook, but it doesn't mean that every time you step into the kitchen, you will make that amazing meal. The meat may be dry, the seasoning too strong, and yes, it could be burnt. But, does that mean, after a single rotten meal, you walk out of the kitchen never to cook again? I think not! You learn from the mistakes. You grow from it. You realize that 2 Tablespoons of saffron was too much and back it off to 1 teaspoon. You consider covering the meat instead of cooking it in an open pan. And yes, when it comes to writing, you need to learn.

Even though this is a subjective business, we do need to work with the responses we have been given. Too often, I hear writers rant and rave about how stupid the editor or agent was and they just didn't get it. You may be right, they might not have gotten it, but that is not their fault and it doesn't make you right. Writing is communications which is "the getting and the giving of informaton". If you give us information that is unclear, we can't get it.

Writing is about growth. If you want to be a professional writer, it is crucial that you learn as you go. If at any point, you say, I know it all, just call your editor or agent and say you quit. You can go no further if you are unwilling to grow.

Scott

Listen!

Wow, how many times have I used that same word? I guess one more time.

I happened to think about this yesterday when I made the comment about the Twilight series. It then got me thinking back to a comment I made a while back about the women's fiction issue. Writers in general tend to struggle with the idea of listening. They are so busy with wanting to make a unique phrase, and come up with a great idea that they often forget to listen to what other people have to say. In then end, this is a huge mistake.

Let me re-cap a couple of those earlier comments. The first was the issue with Women's fiction. I made the comment about UNDER THE TUSCAN SUN and was very clear to point out that I was dealing with the book and not the movie. For those of you that have read the book, you will have noticed that there was a VERY BIG difference between the two. In fact, other than the story set in Cortona and a couple of things with the house, these were really two very different stories. When I used that comment, I used it with the intent of highlighting what was significant with the sub-genre of women's fiction. The comments that came up dealt not with the key elements of women's fiction, but that of the acting ability of Diane Lane.

The second idea was that of the editor begging at the Dallas conference for a vampire teen book. Again, someone had to have been listening (or at least it was a huge coincidence). Unfortunately, most writers would not have heard exactly what this editor was looking for. It was very clear in her comments that the issue was not so much about the book being for teens or that she wanted vampires, but she wanted all of the passion and boiling emotion that we normally see in a vamp story but give the opportunity to the teens to experience it. Ms. Myers did just that.

The last idea is that of comments that come from editors and agents. I'm talking revision letters and general feedback that might come with a rejection. Again, writers make cosmetic changes to their stories but never really listen to the comments that came in the letter. For example, we might say we struggled with the way the hero and heroine dealt with issues in the beginning. We struggled with the way the hero couldn't stand up at a later point. We struggled with how up-front the heroine was in another scene. Now, when the editor or agent wrote this, the odds were that he or she had a list in front of them of a couple of points. Listening to the comment, however, I would say that the bigger issue, or the underlying problem was the lack of balance between the hero and heroine. That this editor or agent wanted a heroine that was weaker and could be saved and the hero was not alpha enough.

So, listen to what people say. Listen to what they write. Do not just take everything for the denotative meaning and leave it at that.

Scott

Getting a bad review

Writing (like acting) is one of those professions where you put yourself out there. Sometimes people will like you and sometimes people won't. I want to take the time today to address those times when someone hates your writing.

Does it hurt? You better believe it. But in most cases, it is probably just a small sting and if you really listen to the critique, you might find the rationale behind the critique. But here is the issue I really want to address.

When you get a bad critique, don't just go running to your friends and get sympathy. Sure, get a few pats on the back but draw the line. I have seen on blogs and listened to writers at conventions whining and moaning about all of the unfair treatment they got on their last book. What is interesting is that the writer is always complaining. Time and time again they get a review that is less than satisfying and off they go on their new round of poor me.

Look get over it. Learn from it and make some changes in your writing.

And as for the good friends out there, get that writer moving and slap some sense into them. I don't care how good of a friend they are, the reviewer might have just been right!

When two or more agree

We always talk about the subjectivity of the publishing business and how what is good for one person might be bad for someone else. This is completely true, however, I have to draw a line with this one.

I think writers have their blinders on when there have been several critics that say the same thing about their writing, and yet they seem to think that they might be wrong. Sure, they may be, but darn it, when several people are saying the same thing, then maybe you as a writer might be the person at fault.

When I talk to writers, I always stress the importance of getting feedback from a lot of people. Not only do you get a chance to hear a lot of perspectives, but it also gives you a chance to follow potential patterns in the comments. Seeing those patterns should give you something to look for and edit later. I should stress though, that when I say to get different perspectives, I mean to find people with very different points of view. If the only people you go to are people who think like you, then you aren't getting what you want.