Critique Checklist
This is a checklist I recently put together for the writers’ group I belong to. Suggestions are welcome
1. Things to Think About When Critiquing A Story
Intent
In any short story or chapter, the writer has specific goals, and you should be able to make some fairly accurate guesses about what those goals are.
Intent is the single most important issue in a critique. The writer knows (or should) what she wants to accomplish. Your job is to tell her whether she’s accomplishing it, and if not, how she might accomplish it. It’s almost always better to question a writer’s intent than it is to debate it. If you can’t determine the intent (or if the writer actually didn’t have specific goals), you can help by focusing the writer on the importance of intent.
What is the writer trying to accomplish? What is she trying to establish about her characters? What is she trying to advance in terms of plot developments? What emotions is she trying to convey? What is the target audience of the piece?
Was she successful? Are there specific things she could have done to be more successful?
Involvement
Did the writer maintain your interest throughout the piece? If you felt your level of interest decrease, try to think about what specifically caused it. Repetition of the same point? Gratuitous description? More detail than necessary?
What could the writer have done to keep your interest level high?
Tension/Conflict
A fiction writer’s most important job is to torture her characters. Conflict doesn’t need to be purely situational or external – it can be internal, psychological or moral too.
Was there tension and conflict in the piece? Try to identify the source of the tension – if you can’t, there’s a problem. How could the writer create more tension? Is the conflict too easy to resolve? Are the characters concerned about things that are truly important?
Voice
“Voice” is a vague idea in fiction writing, but it has a huge impact. It’s the flavor of the writing – the unique insights and perspective that the writer brings to the story. Writing without voice feels mechanical and flat.
Does the writer have a distinct voice? Does each character have a distinct feel? Can you easily tell the characters apart from their dialog?
What sorts of issues does the narrator focus on? Does the writer use metaphor? Are the metaphors fresh and lively? Is there a “mood” to the piece that comes through? Does the writer use cliché?
Voice is one of the toughest things to critique, and it’s usually something that the writer has to find for herself. But still – ask yourself what the writer might do to bring her own voice and perspective into the story.
Pacing
Pacing is the overall speed of events in a story and how that speed changes throughout the piece. It’s also the rate at which the reader is fed new information by the writer. Since uniformity bores us over time, good writing almost always has a varying pace.
Is the pace too slow? Do you find yourself wanting to skip ahead to what will happen next? Is the pace too fast? Do you feel like you have time to digest what happened? Do you lose track of things that happened earlier in the story? Do you know who a character is when they appear or are mentioned?
Does the pace change during the story? Does the writer slow down to dwell on important or emotional moments? Does the writer leave a mystery hanging long enough to keep you intrigued but not so long that you lose interest? What might the writer do to improve the pacing?
Magnification
Magnification is the level of detail in a story, and also the level of intimacy the narrator gives us with the characters. It’s related to pacing (since a high level of detail slows down the action), and like pacing it should vary throughout the story. In general, magnification should be higher when something important or meaningful is happening.
Does the writer describe events and settings in enough detail? Too much detail? Do you feel like you really “know” the characters? Did you feel like you were “there” while you were reading? Does the writer describe things at length that turn out not to be significant? Does the writer give “blow-by-blow” accounts of the characters’ movements? Does the level of magnification change during the piece – does the writer “zoom” in and out on the action in the story? What things could the writer do to make the magnification better?
Consistency and Realism
Characters have to act like real people, or readers will be unable to immerse themselves in the story. Characters also have to act “in character” – they have to act in a way that is true to who they are.
Are the characters’ actions outside of the range of likely human behavior? Consistent with the character’s experience or profession (e.g., a seasoned homicide detective that can’t look at corpses)? Consistent with previous behavior? Proportional to what’s happened (e.g. killing another character over a $20 bet)?
This seems to be one of the most contentious areas in any critique (writers tend to have strong feelings about their characters’ identities), so it’s important to have more than vague feelings that a character is acting unrealistically. If you think a character is acting unrealistically, try to point to the actual text if possible (e.g., “here the character acts in this way, but here he acts completely differently”).
Dialog
Dialog is hard to critique, because fictional dialog is not real-life dialog. But as readers, we usually have good intuitions about what sounds “natural” in a piece of fiction.
Does the dialog sound natural? Is the vocabulary suited to the character? Does the dialog reflect the character’s mood? Are there interruptions? Pauses? Incomplete thoughts? Does the way the characters speak to each other reflect their relationship? Is the dialog appropriate to the situation the character is in? Does the dialog sound good when it’s read aloud?
Description
Does the writer describe people with physical characteristics? Gestures? Actions? Do you feel like you can “see” the setting of each scene? Does the writer use multiple senses (smell, sound, touch) to describe things? Are the descriptions sometimes metaphorical? Do they convey mood? Do they set tone? Do the descriptions come from a particular perspective? Does the writer use small details to create a larger sense of setting or action? Are the descriptive sections too long? Short? What can the writer do to improve her descriptions?
Narrative Mechanics
What is the POV of the story? First-person? Third person? Does the POV work for you? What tense is the story told in? Is the tense consistent? Is the narrator omniscient? Limited? Does the narrator have her own separate voice in the story? Is that appropriate for what the writer is trying to do? Does the writer have specific reasons for choosing the POV, person, tense, etc.? Do those reasons serve the story? If the writer chooses unconventional mechanics, does the payoff of that choice outweigh the discomfort of the reader in adapting to it?
Genre
Does the piece fit within a particular genre? Are there specific expectations that the genre creates? Is the writer meeting those expectations? Subverting them? Are you a fan of the genre? If not, can you still relate to the piece as a story? If you are truly not a fan of the genre, and it gets in the way of evaluating the story, let the writer know and recuse yourself from the critique. Otherwise, your critique will end up sounding like a general critique of the genre.
2. Things to Remember When Giving a Critique
Imagine Being a Reader
Keep in mind that you are a writer in addition to being a reader. That means that your perspective is going to be different than most of the writer’s target audience. When thinking about the story, try to
occasionally imagine being a plain old reader.
How You Say It
How you put things during your critique is at least as important as what you say. If you tell a writer, “this chapter was boring”, she’s not going to listen to the rest of what you have to say. Beyond being rude, statements like that are also factually false, since what’s boring to one reader might be fascinating to another. That doesn’t mean you should say, “this chapter bored me” instead. Try to speak from your own perspective, cite specific parts of the text, and use non-judgemental language. In this case something like, “The description of the main character’s shoe on pages 10 through 46 felt a little long to me – I was wanting to find out what happened next” is going to be more effective.
If you feel like the above advice is politically correct bullshit, you should probably refrain from doing critiques at all. It has nothing to do with touchy-feelyness: people simply won’t listen to your advice if they feel attacked or judged as a person, and your critique will just raise the discomfort for everyone in the room.
Ask Questions
Your critique doesn’t have to be a monologue. It’s always appropriate to ask questions about the writer’s intent, and it’s often useful to ask about the particulars of characters, plot, etc. Quite often, the writer knows something about the character or story that needs to be put in the text.
Positivity
A critique is as much about what you liked as what you didn’t. It’s often a great idea to start and end your critique with things you liked. If you didn’t like anything at all, recuse yourself politely. In general, it’s okay to say things like, “I just don’t feel like I know enough about sci-fi to critique your story,” or “Experimental fiction just isn’t my cup of tea”.
Practicality
Remember that a critique should be practical. If you’re just saying, “I liked this” or “I didn’t like that”, it’s not going to be helpful. Always think about ways that the writer could change the things that are problems for you in the story. Be as specific as you can.
Let It Go
You might find yourself trying to persuade a writer that you’re right on a particular point. This is an important part of critique, but in the end, it’s the writer’s story to do with what she wants. Say it as clearly as you can, attempt to verify that the writer understands what you’re trying to convey, then let it go.
Golden Rule
When you think about what you’re going to say, imagine someone else saying the same thing to you in a critique. If it makes you wince, rephrase.