By Danielle M. Angeline

(From the March 2005 issue of the Update.)

I had not planned on writing a follow-up article to “Yikes! A First Time Judge! What Did I Get Myself Into?” but in the course of working on recruiting judges for the 2005 Marlene, I finally decided to have my writing critiqued. I happily donated my forty dollar check to the Trisha Jenson Critique Fund, knowing it would serve two purposes: one—it was helping out a fellow author in need and two—I would get back some very much needed feedback from a pro.

My critique finally arrived after numerous e-mail and computer glitches.  I had the same sweaty-palm-heart-pounding affliction as I did when I had signed up to be a judge for the 2004 Marlene contest.  It was my hope this critique was chock-full of praise and that I was going to be the next breakout author.  After all, I had dared to let someone critique my work, so I should get a five-star review—Right? Wrong!

The first sentence of my critique was, “I’d dump your prologue. It was hackneyed and trite. An editor will not read ANY further based on your prologue.” Slam! I thought I had been hit over the head with a two by four, which caused several unprintable expletives to fly out of my mouth followed by, “She’s got some nerve telling me this!”

Still, I forged forward and was surprised when I read the following, “HOWEVER, I do like the idea of your hero trying to satisfy his sister’s dying wish as the impetus for this novel. I just think it needs to be done differently. This, of course, is only my opinion. Remember, critiques are subjective. Someone else may disagree with me.”

Finally, I breathed a sigh of relief for she had reminded me that it was just her opinion. But then I was blasted for too many characters, too many flashbacks, too many dialogue tags and switching or “headhopping” with my point of view.”

I was ready to throw in the towel and give up my writing career, but not before I forwarded the critique to a trusted author friend, who graciously but firmly pointed out: “Repeat after me: I will never again talk about giving up on my writing!”

Her e-mail continued with, “I really don’t think her critique was a slam. If she didn’t see any potential in your novel, she wouldn’t have given you so many specific suggestions, and it’s clear from her comments that she likes your storyline.”

As for point of view, my friend offered this, “I agree with her about POV switches; sometimes the story requires the plot being told from the heroine’s perspective.” She gave me additional, productive advice, and I am thankful that she did not sugarcoat the situation. My friend ended her e-mail with, “Above all, don’t ever give up.  I’m constantly reading “how to” books and advice from writers in an effort to improve my writing and will probably never stop trying to strengthen my writing in one way or another. Each month, I pick one area to study; January is Active Voice Month!” That final tidbit made me giggle.

Since receiving my critique and e-mail response from my author friend, I have woven together what these other two authors have suggested. For the month of January, I am focusing on point of view research. But I must add this final note. I have, once again, learned more about myself as a writer than from the critique itself. And that is, being critiqued is indeed someone’s opinion, but it is how I chose to react, digest, and act on the information that makes all the difference in the world.

~~~~~
Danielle M. Angeline is an associate editor for the WRW Newsletter and along with Courtney Hunt, a judge recruiter for the 2005 Marlene.