Get the Most from Critique Sessions

Mark up the manuscript, commenting on what you see that you like as well as the things that didn't work for you.

If you find your mind wandering as you read, or you're pulled out of the story, mark where that happens. You'll return the manuscripts, so make sure your writing is legible.

Come prepared with notes, not just handwritten comments on the pages, but one or two pages of prepared comments to refer to. The notes should include the major points you want to make. You'll be able to quickly make your points if you don't have to flip through the pages trying to decipher your handwriting.

Start with something positive, both in your written and verbal comments. Mention the things that are well done.

When giving verbal comments, don't worry about the minor things, like typos. The writer will see them later, when you return the pages.

Focus your verbal comments on the larger issues: pacing, point of view, conflict, characterization, if you were unable to suspend disbelief, etc.

Be specific. Don't just say "the dialogue is weak," or "the POV switches are confusing." Mark specific examples and use them in the discussion to explain your opinion.

Give first reactions. Did the story hold your interest? Was the main character sympathetic? One of the most precious things you can give is your first impression, because you only have the chance to do that once.

Don't dominate the session. If the group has thirty minutes and six members, you have only five minutes per person for comments, and you'll need to take less time than that so there is a little time for discussion. You'll learn a lot from others, so don't spend all the time talking, especially about typos.

When You're on the Receiving End

Submit your best quality work. If the submission is sloppy, the comments will be focused on simple errors and waste valuable time on easily corrected mistakes.

Don't expect everyone to love your work. No matter how wonderful it is, that will never happen.

Take criticism gracefully. Refrain from being defensive. Keep your emotions in check.

Let the others know what areas you feel need work, and ask if they have suggestions or understand what you were trying to achieve.

Thank everyone for his or her comments.

Remember, the comments you receive are just opinions. You don't have to incorporate all suggestions into your manuscript. On the other hand, if you get more than one comment about the same point, it likely needs to be addressed, perhaps not in the way suggested, but it is probably a spot that needs work.

Things to Consider when Critiquing:

Start with the basics: Spelling, grammar, punctuation, unneeded words, adverbs. Point these out on the manuscript, but don't bother mentioning in the critique session unless they are a recurring problem.

Story:

Are there opening hooks (for both the start of the manuscript and the beginning of each chapter,) as well as hooks at the end of chapters?

Is the conflict strong, or is it contrived and something a conversation could resolve?

Setting? Does it seem real?

Are the senses involved? (description of smell, touch, taste, etc.)

Does the story hold your interest? If not, where did you lose interest?

Accuracy and consistency: Do the facts seem accurate, (no cell phones in the 1700s, for example) and are they consistent (blue eyes don't turn green somewhere along the way.)

Were you able to suspend disbelief?

Does the story work? Do you want to read more?

With characters, ask yourself: Are the main characters three-dimensional? Sympathetic? Are other characters well drawn? Are motivations strong and clear?

Writing Style

Voice: Strong? Too passive?

Any problems with point of view? If there are multiple points of view, are the POV changes handled well?

Does the dialogue sound natural? Is the dialogue of each character distinct, or does everyone sound the same?

Does the dialogue move the story forward?

Were there too many "he said" dialogue tags, or awkward substitutes for "said?" (snarled, hissed.)

As to back story: Is it woven into the story, or are there any info dumps or "As you know, Bob"s (use of dialogue to dump information into the story.)

Is there too much narrative? Too many flashbacks?

Are the sentences clear, or do they need to be reworded to improve clarity?

Is the story well-paced, or does it slow in places?

Is there plenty of white space, or is the writing dense? (In other words, are the paragraphs short and interspersed with dialogue, or are they long blocks of type running a half page-or more.)

Synopsis:

Is there enough conflict to carry the story?

Are the main plot points included?

Is there too much detail?

Are characters' goals/motivations/conflicts clear?

Does the feel of the story (humorous, suspenseful, etc.) come through in the synopsis?

Being prepared and staying objective will help the participants get the most out of critiquing.