Find Blogs

How To Critique A Beginning Writer’s Weak Manuscript Write a comment.
blog by RICK WALTON listed in categories: Writer's Life

As a teacher, a consultant, a friend, I do LOTS of critiquing of beginning writers’ manuscripts. A lot of them are really bad.

I could be brutally honest, but I’m not Simon Cowell. Besides, I don’t believe in brutal honesty. For several reasons…

1. I don’t believe it’s really honest. It ignores the possibilities, however minute. It ignores context. It overemphasizes weaknesses, and ignores strengths. There are always strengths.

1. I don’t know everything. Just because I think that something is bad writing, that doesn’t mean that huge portions of the population won’t think otherwise. There are quite a few bestsellers that I just can’t stand. But they speak to somebody, and who am I to deny those readers’ experiences.
2. The writer is a human being. How my feedback affects who they are is much more important than how it affects how they write.
3. Sometimes, with encouragement and guidance, a bad writer becomes a good writer. I don’t want to be the one who stops a potentially good writer from saying something important that only they can say.

But by coddling a writer, by not telling them the truth, aren’t I doing them a disservice? Wouldn’t it be better if they gave up and went on to something that they are good at?

Well, yes, I would be doing them a disservice if I weren’t telling them the truth. But I do tell them the truth. Just not all at once. It’s a balance, telling the author what they need to know to become better writers without sending them into an emotional tailspin.

But it can be done. And here’s how…

First, find several good things to say about the manuscript. You can always find something. You could find good things to say about the novel prospects of the phone book if you wanted to (“great character and location possibilities!”)

Pointing out the good first, ensures against revisions that destroy what was working, and softens the blow of the suggestions that are to come. My favorite editors are good at this. They make me feel so good about myself that I am grateful for any advice that they give.

Second, give the writer two or three major things that need to be done to make the manuscript better. Not many more than that, or the writer will be overwhelmed. Just show them the next couple of steps forward. And instead of saying “Here’s what’s wrong”, tell them “Here’s what you can do to make your story even better.” Give them a vision.

Third, if they actually follow your advice, and they improve the manuscript and ask you to review it again, tell them it’s getting better, and give them a few more things to work on. By now, writers who are not serious will have realized that it’s not worth the effort, and will drop out. This is a self-correcting process. I’ve never had to tell a clueless writer to stop.

Fourth, repeat as needed. If the writer works on the manuscript enough, who knows, it might actually end up being good.

I’ve seen it happen.

Posted in December, 2007