How to deal with Criticism in Writing

Editor note: This post is part of the Guest Post Giveaway at the blog Unready and Willing.  If you think articles about writing or personal development (or personal development for writers) sounds like a good  fit for your blog, please take a look at the Guest Post Giveaway page and see if any of the articles spark your interest.

How can a writer learn to deal with criticism? Many writers go to great lengths to avoid it, and the reason why is simple. They have come to look at negative criticism as a reflection of their deficiencies, and no one likes to have their faults pointed out to them.

Even when these writers decide to face their critics, they face them as opponents, as those they must argue with and prove wrong. To think of criticism as something to avoid or oppose is to halt our growth as writers. In order to improve our skills as writers it’s important to learn how to deal with criticism. Rather than avoid criticism, we should actively seek it out so that we can learn how to improve our writing. Also, if we look to our critics not as our opponents, but as our allies, we’ll find that not only will our writing improve, but we can be more productive writers, less encumbered by thoughts of criticism as we write.

Learning how to deal with criticism is not easy, especially when you’re locked in the mindset of avoidance and opposition, but I have found the following guidelines very helpful for me to learn not just how to deal with criticism, but learn to embrace it:

In order to learn how do deal with criticism a writer must:

• Learn to value criticism


• Write without thinking about criticism


• Listen to criticism openly


• Respond to criticism effectively

Learn to value criticism

Criticism is an opportunity to improve.

Avoiding criticism is the surefire path to mediocrity. Each time we avoid criticism we avoid an opportunity to improve ourselves. One of the most common ways we avoid criticism is simply by not doing—by not writing, by not speaking, by not creating. People who stop taking action do it because they’ve let criticism hurt them rather than help them, and the easiest way to avoid the criticism is to simply “not do.”

Another way we avoid criticism is by rationalization, by explaining to ourselves why whatever criticism we receive is wrong and should be ignored. The reason why we want the criticism to be wrong is because criticism is seen as an attack on our ego. When we perceive such an attack our psyche goes into self-defense mode and does its best to rationalize why the criticism we receive is wrong.

In order to learn to deal with criticism and stop avoiding it, we must remove the “I” from the picture. Remember that it’s not “you” who is wrong, but your idea. The pain we feel when we receive criticism comes when we can’t separate ourselves from our ideas. Ideas may be a product of our mind, but they are not our mind. Sharing our ideas and having them criticized is the only way we can objectively examine how our mind is working. If our ideas are faulty, criticism gives us an opportunity to rethink our ideas and reeducate ourselves for the better.
Continue to look at criticism as an opportunity to improve rather than something to diminish by rationalization. You’ll find that not only will it be easier to deal with criticism, but the more you learn to listen to it, the less of it you’ll get.

Realize the value of a wrong answer

The problem with modern education is that everything depends on a right answer. If you don’t parrot out the facts and dates you’re bound to get a bad grade. This system, where the wrong answer is punished, not only discourages creativity, but it locks us into the mindset that criticism is bad and to be avoided. To be criticized, in effect, is to have the wrong answer. We’ve been conditioned to believe that having the wrong answer is a waste of time: if you aren’t right, then something must be wrong with you.

However, there have been many great thinkers in history who had the wrong answer, and if they didn’t have the courage to make their wrong answer public, our arts and sciences, everything in our culture, would have suffered. Ptolemy, for example, came up with the idea that the Earth was basically a motionless orb and that everything else in the universe: the planets, the sun and the stars revolved around it in things called “celestial spheres.” Ptolemy’s idea was wrong—dead wrong, but it was the one of first complete models of the universe by which an astronomer could make an accurate mathematical prediction. Ptolemy’s “wrong answer” helped enrich our understanding of the heavenly bodies in the sky, and paved the way for more accurate models in the future. Copernicus, who came up with the heliocentric model hundreds of years later, may not have come up with his “right answer” if he didn’t have Ptolemy’s model to criticize and simplify.

Sigmund Freud is another great mind who had countless wrong answers. Nearly all his theories about the human psyche have been discredited. Despite being wrong most of the time, Freud is considered the father of modern psychology and is still revered by psychologists the world over. What Freud had was the boldness to challenge our perception of the human psyche. He fearlessly provided his best educated guesses as to why and how we think the way we think. Though most of his guesses were wrong, they provided the impetus for those who followed to come up with answers that were closer to the truth.
So have the courage to express your ideas, even the ones that might be wrong. Some of the greatest achievements of humankind started with the wrong answer.

Write without thinking about criticism

When writing, it’s important to clear all thoughts of criticism out of your mind. The reason for this is that if you continue to think about the criticism you might receive as you write, not only will this thinking hinder the flow of your writing, but it’ll also affect the character of your writing. Have you ever noticed the emotional tug-of-war that takes place when you fear your writing will be bad? Your subconscious mind, which cannot distinguish a negative thought from a positive one, actually thinks that you want to produce bad writing and everything that comes out on the page seems bland, unoriginal, and unexciting. The more you fear your writing will turn out bad, the more bad writing you’ll produce. And eventually you’ll find yourself doing the type-delete, type-delete, two-step all the way to the end.

Avoid Perfectionism

One of my favorite rules of writing comes from the playwright August Wilson: “You can make no mistakes, but anything you write can be made better.” I’d like to add a little addendum to that rule:“Although anything you write can be made better, there comes a point where you can’t make it better.” Recognize that you can only write to the best of your abilities. If you find yourself constantly tweaking your writing, vacillating between one small change and another, it’s probably time for you to hand it over to an editor or one of your peers for their review. Rely on your critics to provide you with the perspective you need to improve your writing when you can no longer do it yourself.

Write with Authority

Just because you should be accepting of criticism doesn’t mean that you have to make it easy for your critics to find fault in your writing. It’s important that whenever you write you sound like an expert, that you sound like an authority. This is true in fiction as well as in non-fiction.

For non-fiction, eliminate all the “I believes” or “I thinks” for your writing and stand behind your arguments as though they were rock solid. If you write like an expert most people will assume you’re an expert, and people will hesitate to criticise an expert more often than they would a layman, even if they completely disagree with you. Also, if you write with authority and do receive criticism, most likely the kind of criticism that you’ll receive will be more thought-out and constructive. Since you’re an authority, people will be very careful about the language they use against you for fear of them being criticized for their critique!

Authority in writing fiction, on the other hand, is essentially knowing all elements of your story inside and out. Although you aren’t necessarily putting your ideas on trial as you would with non-fiction, you’re putting your mastery of narrative on trial. In fiction, you should be the expert on your characters and settings, and even if you don’t exactly know the ending as you write it, you should convey the sense to the reader that you, the author, know exactly how it’s going to end.

Listen to the Criticism Openly

Listening to and fully understanding the criticism you receive is essential if you want to respond effectively to your critics. It’s important to understand exactly why people are criticising you so that you can come up with the most relevant response possible.

In general, there are three kinds of criticism you’ll receive:

1. Constructive criticism – This is the best possible kind of criticism. With constructive criticism people are really trying to help you improve what you write. The problem is that often when people try to offer constructive criticism they might be “too nice” and tend to overlook the faults in your work.


2. The tear-apart – This is the kind of criticism that writers fear the most, where every single element of their writing is taken to task. Sometimes the tear-apart can be quite useful in revealing the places you need to improve. Be wary, however, of those critiques that are designed to make the critic look smart at the writer’s expense.


3. Personal attacks – Comments like “This poem is boring,” or “I can’t believe what an idiot you are,” are personal attacks directed at the writer and have no relevance to the actual writing. Basically any malicious attack directed at the writer can be interpreted as: “Your writing angered me but since I can’t come up with a good critique of it, I’ll criticise you instead.” Personal attacks are evidence that you’re doing your job as a writer: challenging people with your ideas. Whenever you receive a personal attack, pat yourself on the back for a job well done.

Sorting it all out

Just because we should welcome criticism and use it to help us improve our writing doesn’t mean that all criticism should be treated equally. It can be difficult, however, to sort it all out. Personal attacks, as they provide no value whatsoever, are the easiest to dismiss. After that, however, it becomes more difficult to determine just what critiques are valuable and what critiques aren’t. Often criticism will be contradictory. One person will say that your story’s characters didn’t have enough depth while another will say they liked the characters. It’s much easier for us to agree with the latter than the former of course, but that doesn’t mean we should dismiss a critique just because someone else dismissed it. Oftentimes the critiques that make us most uncomfortable indicate the biggest opportunities for improvement.

One good way to sort out criticism is to put all your critiques on a sheet of paper and gauge your emotional reaction to each. For example, if you write a story and someone says “I believe the story was good, but a little too long,” see how that makes you feel. The more emotionally resistant you feel to a critique, the more you should listen to it. Emotional resistance to a critique results from the conflict between the intuitive feeling that your critic is probably right, and the ego-based impetus to ignore it. If you listen to the critique you’ll feel bad because your ego will be damaged. If you don’t listen to the critique you’ll feel bad because you know intuitively that the critique had substance, and that by ignoring it you’re neglecting your duties as a writer. It can be difficult at first to implement criticism in the face of emotional resistance, but if you continue to listen to and make use of the criticism you receive, over time you’ll find that the rewards of making improvements to your writing will far outweigh any fears of damaged pride.

So what if you don’t feel any emotional resistance to a particular critique? Simple. Dismiss it! If you truly feel a critique has no substance and feel no emotional resistance to it, chances are that the critique will do little to help you improve your writing.

Respond to Criticism Effectively

Although many writers learn to appreciate the criticism they receive, I’ve seen few cases where writers respond to their criticism effectively. Most responses I’ve seen to criticism generally go along the lines of: “Thank you for your alternative viewpoint! I guess in some cases what you argue can be true, but actually what I meant was…”
What a response like this does is dismiss the criticism with an insincere concession, then passive-aggressively fights back with a counter-argument. This is unfortunate because giving criticism and responding to criticism should not be viewed a fencing match. It should be an opportunity to create a dialogue about the subject and help both parties reach a greater understanding of whatever subject it is.
Here are some guidelines for responding to criticism effectively:

1. Make concessions first – Do your best to see where you can agree with your critics. When responding to any critique be sure to open with: “Actually I think you may be right about X. I never really saw it that way before.” Paying your critics complements from the beginning do much to disarm them and open them up for a two way discussion instead of back and forth volleys of arguments and counter-arguments. Remember, you want to open a dialogue, not start a shouting match.


2. Defend your arguments with questions – After you’ve paid your critic a complement by making a concession, he or she is much more likely to listen to what you have to say next. Instead of saying, “I think you’re wrong about the story being too long because…” ask a question instead. For example, you could ask: “Could you explain to me what you mean about the story being too long?” What this does is give your critic their due respect. It’s a proposition, not a challenge, and thus he or she is more likely to respond in a civil and constructive way. If this dialogue goes back and forth enough times, who knows, you may even reach an agreement!


3. If you fail to reach an agreement, agree to disagree – The argument between you and your critic remains unresolved, but this gives both of you time to read more and think more about whatever topic you’re discussing. It gives you time to refine your ideas and make them stronger.

My Personal Experience

I’ve found that learning to deal with criticism has done a lot for my growth as a writer. Oftentimes I would only listen to those who said my writing was good, and thought that anyone who criticized my work didn’t know what they were talking about. After realizing my writing wasn’t really improving by ignoring my critics, I endeavored to try to listen to them. At first listening to the criticism was quite painful. But, over time, I found that not only was it easier to listen to criticism but also that my writing had improved. Opening myself up to criticism has really helped take my writing to the next level.

Kenji Crosland is a creative writing major who, scared of becoming a starving artist, became a corporate headhunter in Tokyo. Since then he’s regained his sanity, quit his job, and currently blogs about creating an ideal career at unreadyandwilling.com. Follow him on twitter @KenjiCrosland.

Posted on February 07 2010

You should subscribe to the RSS feed here.

Sharing is sexy!