Poynter Online Poynter Online
New UserLogin
Poynter Online Main Page
Design / Graphics
Writing / Editing
TV / Radio
About Poynter
Resource Center
The Poynter Store

Help Poynter

Create Your Personal Page
Add Your Bio
Add Your Photo
Share Your Favorite Links

Signup for Poynter Newsletters
Get Poynter Delivered to Your PDA

ASNE Online Ethics Tool

Posted, Mar. 22, 2005
Updated, Mar. 22, 2005

QuickLink: A79160

Writing Tool #49: Learn from Criticism
Even severe or cynical criticism can help a writer.

By Roy Peter Clark (more by author)
Senior Scholar, Poynter Institute

E-mail this item
Print this Page
Add/View Comments on this Article (8)

More in this series


Wanna learn more? Check out our reporting, writing, and editing seminars.

Click here to receive Writer's Toolbox each week by e-mail.

Do your best to tolerate even unreasonable criticism of your work as a way of growing as a writer.

I've saved one of the hardest lessons for near the end. I don't know anyone who enjoys negative criticism, especially of creative work. But such criticism can be priceless -- if you learn how to use it. The right frame of mind can transform criticism that is nasty, petty, insincere, biased, even profane, into gold.

This alchemy requires one magic strategy: The receptive writer must convert debate into conversation. In a debate, one side listens only to find a counter-argument. In a conversation, there is give and take. A debate ends with a winner and a loser. A conversation can conclude with both sides learning, and a promise of more to come.

As hard as it is to follow, I long ago made a resolution that will sound like a Herculean impossibility: I never defend my story against criticism.

Not defend your story? That sounds as impossible as not blowing out a match as it burns toward your fingers. The reflex to defend your work against attack is a force of nature, the literary equivalent of flight or fight.

Let's take a hypothetical example. Say I've written this news lead out of a city council meeting: "Should the Seattle police be able to peep at the peepers in the peep shows?"

Now say I get this criticism from an editor. "Roy, you've got much too much peeping going on here for my taste. You've turned a serious story about privacy into a cute play on words. I was expecting Little Bo Peep to show up. Ha, ha."

Such criticism is likely to make me angry and defensive, but I've come to believe that argument is useless. I like all that peeping.  My editor hates it. He prefers a lead such as, "The city council debated whether the Seattle police should be able to go undercover as part of the effort to see whether adult businesses are adhering to municipal regulations of their activities." My editor suffers from omnivorous gravity. He thinks I suffer from irreversible levity.

One of the oldest bits of wisdom about art goes like this, and please excuse the Latin: "De gustibus non est disputandum." There can be no arguing about matters of taste. I think "Moby Dick" is too long. You think abstract art is too abstract. My chili is too spicy. You reach for the Tabasco.

What, then, is the alternative to a donnybrook? If I don't fight to defend my work, won't I lose control to people who do not share my values?

Here's the alternative: Never defend your work, but explain what you were trying to accomplish. So, "Jack, I can see that all that peeping in my lead didn't work for you. I was just trying to find a way for readers to be able to see the impact of this policy. I didn't want to let the police action get lost in a lot of bureaucratic language." That response is more likely to turn a debate (one the writer is likely to lose) into a conversation (in which the editor might convert from adversary to ally).

My friend Anthea Penrose offered a negative criticism of my short, short chapters for the serial narrative "Three Little Words." She said something like, "It wasn't enough for me. Just when I was getting into it, you were finished. I wanted more."

How could I possibly change her mind? And why should I? If the chapters are too short for her, they are too short. So here was my response: "Anthea, you're not the first one to respond that way to the short chapters. They clearly do not work for some readers. By using short chapters, I was trying to lure into the story time-starved readers who say they never read any enterprise work. I've received a few messages from readers who told me they appreciate my concern for their time, that this is the first series in the Times that they have ever read."

Another critic: "I hated the way you ended that chapter after Jane was tested for HIV and didn't tell the me results of the test right away. I wanted to know now. But you made me wait until the next day's paper. I thought that was really exploitative."

My response: "You know, Jane was tested a number of times, and back then she might have to wait a couple of weeks for the results. I came to understand how excruciating it must have been to wait that long, with life and death in the balance. So I thought if I made the reader wait overnight for the results, it would get you to identify with her plight and empathize."

Such a response always softened the tone of the critic and tore down the wall between us. Knocking down the obstacle created openings for conversation, for questioning, for learning on both sides.

In summary:

  • Do not fall into the trap of arguing about matters of taste.
  • Do not, as a reflex, defend your work against negative criticism.
  • Explain to your critic what you were attempting to do.
  • Transform arguments into conversations.

Even when the attack is personal, try to deflect it in your mind back onto the work. "What was it in the story that would provoke such anger?" If you can learn to use criticism in these ways, you will continue to grow and grow as a writer throughout your career.

Bug - Writer's Toolbox

1. Remember a time when someone delivered harsh criticism of your writing. Write down the criticism. Force yourself to write down something you learned from the criticism that you can apply to your future work.

2. Using that same example of criticism, write a memo to your critic explaining what you were trying to accomplish by writing the story the way you did.

3. Be your own harshest critic. Review a batch of your stories and write down ways that each could have been better.

4. People tend to be harsher and more insensitive when they deliver criticism from a distance via e-mail. The next time you receive criticism this way, resist the urge to fire back a response. Take some time to recover. Then practice the advice offered above:  explain to your critic what you were trying to accomplish.

5. Writers often know what is wrong with a story when they hand it in. Sometimes we try to hide these weaknesses from editors.  What would happen if we began to express them as part of the writing and editing process? Perhaps this would change the nature of the conversation and get writers and editors working together.

More in this series:

E-mail this item
Print this Page
Add/View Comments on this Article (8)

Back to Top

  • One more thing
  • I get nervous if I don't have an...
  • Tough Critics
  • What about regular hecklers?
  • Defending Your Work

  • --VIEW ALL--

    Search Poynter Online
    Search Poynter Online
    Search 221 Journalism Sites
    Search 221 Journalism Sites
    Search Poynter Online

    Welcome to Writing Tools: The Book and the Blog
    Welcome to Writing Tools: The Book and the Blog
    New On Poynter
    Space Flight History
    Links to the News

    P1: Independence Day
    Niagara Gazette

    Mexican Election News
    By Juan Camus

    Drawing the Line
    Kelly McBride Comments

    Dogs & Fireworks
    Al's Tuesday Meeting

    NBC & YouTube
    By Amy Gahran

    Laws & Missing Links
    By Amy Gahran

    Net Neutrality & You
    By Amy Gahran

    Good News Conversation
    By Amy Gahran

    The Joke Project
    By Adam Glenn

    Online Credibility
    By Laura Ruel

    Text Ads Work Best
    By Laura Ruel

    Online Leaders Meet
    By Laura Ruel

    Facing the Future
    By Kelly McBride

    Related Faculty
    Related Seminars
    Narrative Writing on Deadline
    Oct. 8-13, 2006
    App. deadline: Aug. 7, 2006

    Beat Reporting: Covering Children
    Nov. 5-10, 2006
    App. deadline: Sep. 5, 2006

    The Complete Assigning Editor
    Nov. 12-17, 2006
    App. deadline: Sep. 11, 2006

    Advanced Copy Editing: A Word-By-Word Approach
    Dec. 3-8, 2006
    App. deadline: Sep. 25, 2006

      Site Map | Search Poynter | Contact Poynter | FAQ | Our Guidelines QuickLink  
      Copyright © 1995-2006 The Poynter Institute
      801 Third Street South | St. Petersburg, FL 33701 | Phone (888) 769-6837
      Site developed & hosted by DataGlyphics, Inc.