Filling in for me today is Tom Milani, one of my amazing critique partners. He graciously reads my short fiction before submission. He truly has a gift for highlighting ways to improve story and delivering feedback in a collaborative way. His thoughtful notes have elevated my work. I’m delighted he is joining us today to discuss the art of critique.— Stacy Woodson
Learning to Give and Receive Critique
by Tom Milani
For new writers or writers new to critique groups, reviewing the work of others (and having their own work reviewed) can be hard. I’ve been in writing groups for over thirty years, and I was a technical editor for nearly that long. As a result, I have a lot of experience giving critiques of other people’s writing and receiving critiques of my own. Here, I’ll go over what I’ve found works for me. These aren’t hard-and-fast rules, but I hope these lessons I’ve learned will be helpful.
Dealing with Comments on Your Work
Members of the critique group I belong to typically send a Microsoft Word file with their changes tracked. (If you’re not familiar with Word’s Track Changes function, it’s worth exploring because many acquiring editors will expect you to know how to use it.) I go through each member’s edits and notes separately. I’ll open a file but make notes on my hard copy. (You could do the same thing electronically, but because I’m working on a small laptop, hard copy is easier for me.) I correct typographical and grammatical errors right away. If there are comments, I’ll often note those on the page. In doing so, I’ll find issues that several people have flagged. What if I get conflicting opinions about an aspect of my story? Here, I consider the numbers. If seven people out of eight people point out a potential problem, chances are I should look at the text again. But if the opinions are evenly divided, then I’ll go with my own judgment.
In an ideal world (or writing group), the comments I receive will be given in a constructive, nonconfrontational matter. What happens if the comments are delivered with snark, or worse? Here’s what I do when my work gets criticism that feels personal. I read the comments. I read them again. And again. I continue rereading until they no longer provoke an emotional reaction in me. Then, I look at the substantive portions of the comments. Are they valid? If so, I address them in rewrites. If not, I ignore them. Regardless of how the comments are given, I make a point to remember that someone took the time to read my work and offer an opinion about it.
Critiquing the Work of Others
I read an article on editing that suggested making critiques using passive voice. It’s a nonconfrontational method of pointing out problems. I used it successfully in my professional career and find it works as well with fiction writing.
If I see a problem in work I’m reading, I’ll frame my comments in passive voice. For example: “The text on this page feels like it spends a lot of time describing this character’s appearance, but this is the only scene in which she appears.” Here, the comment is directed not at the writer, but at the text itself. There’s nothing personal in the comment—I’m not questioning why the author wrote what he did—instead, we’re both working to solve a problem. It’s a simple switch in mindset, but one I feel causes the author to look at the comments with greater objectivity. Similarly, if I suggest a rewording, I’ll give a reason for the suggestion and generally follow that with some version of “your words will be better.” I’m not trying to rewrite the author’s prose but to point out where something is confusing or unclear to me. My rewording is an attempt to tease out the meaning that the author intended, while honoring the author’s voice.
What if I’m asked to critique a piece, and I don’t know the conventions of the genre? In that case, I focus on those aspects of the writing that need to be correct, regardless of genre—grammar, spelling, punctuation, and internal consistency—and if something is confusing or unclear, I’ll point it out (again, using passive voice).
Other Benefits
Critiquing other people’s work makes me look at my own writing with a more critical eye. Recognizing how well an author planned a plot twist or admiring how the varied pacing in a story maintained tension has led me to incorporate those elements into my own work.
But an even greater benefit is contributing to the writing community at large. Being a member of a critique group is one way to be a good literary citizen. My experience with the crime fiction community is that it’s supportive and generous—and being a good critique partner is one way to pay that generosity forward.
Tom Milani’s short fiction has appeared or is forthcoming in several anthologies, including Mickey Finn: 21st Century Noir volumes 5 and 6. “Barracuda Backfire,” his novella, is Book 4 of Michael Bracken’s Chop Shop series and was shortlisted for a Derringer award. His short story, "Mill Mountain" was featured this week in Black Cat Weekly, and Places That Are Gone, his debut novel, was released on May 13, 2025.
I was the only guy in a critique class. We always read aloud a chapter, a short story, an essay, or a poem, and then the group took turns commenting. We briefly took on two new members, a goth girl who wrote delicate little romances and burst into tears at the slightest criticism, and an ex-Vietnam vet who burst into anger. They lasted a couple of weeks before dropping out. Apparently the core group had thicker skin.
ReplyDeleteSadly, I pictured a scene where decades later a granddaughter stumbles across a drawer of yellowed manuscripts. She tells her grandmother the stories are beautiful and why didn't she publish them? Because no one had read Tom Milani’s book.
N.B. One particularly sweet lady seemed more interested in the social and companionable aspects than the writing and critiquing. When it came her turn for criticism, she invariably said in her Southern accent, "I lacked it, I really lacked it." That experience made me realize I preferred strong, honest comments than compliments.