Here in my Slam Master's Rants, I spend a lot of time discussing each month's Slammables. I highlight interesting stylistic choices, focus in on popular themes, identify the common threads that tie each month's featured pieces together. But if our site posted only poetry and prose, it would only be half of what it is. Without the critiques -- the thoughtful responses that you, our devoted Slammers, submit every day -- The Slam simply couldn't function.

On The Slam, we don't just showcase young writers' work: we provide a forum for discussion and feedback to help every writer grow. We seek to promote constructive criticism that authors can use to build on their skills and ideas. Whole volumes have been written on how to be a good constructive critic, and the full scope of the topic is certainly too broad for the confines of a single Rant. But at the behest of one of our Slammers, I'd like to offer a few tips on writing a good critique -- focusing on three major pitfalls that our Slammers frequently tumble into. Avoid these potholes, and you'll be well on your way to providing valuable criticism that your fellow Slammers can use and appreciate.

First up: hyperbole. Let's face it, dear Slammers, we're all tempted to exaggerate now and then: "This is the worst poem I've ever seen!" "This is the best story I've ever read!" But when writing critiques, stay realistic. Instead of focusing on the extremes (because wherever a poem or story falls on the spectrum, there will always be something "better" and something "worse"), hone in on the elements that worked, or didn't work, for you. What was it, exactly, that made the poem so confusing, or the story so exciting? Many Slam critiquers insist that they can't think of anything to change -- but if that's the case, try to pinpoint the elements that make the work as good as it is. Telling a Slammer that a piece is perfect won't aid that author in improving, but stating what you'd like to see more of just might help.

That leads us to a second common pitfall: ambiguity. If you're a writer, you've no doubt received such bemusing criticisms as "I just couldn't relate to your character" or "I just didn't get what was going on." This kind of vagueness won't help an author improve, but it's an easy pitfall to avoid. Before posting any critique, read it through once and check to make sure that the author will know exactly what you're talking about. Give examples. Is the language cliché? Point out one or two phrases that are especially hackneyed. Is the rhythm a little rough? Highlight the offending lines. Is the plot line hard to follow? Hone in on a transition that confused you. Be specific. Referring to a particular line or paragraph is good; referring to specific words or sentences is even better. And don't forget that this applies to positive criticism, too. The more specific your praise, the easier it will be for the author to incorporate positive elements into future pieces.

Finally, there's the disclaimer -- the crisis of confidence. Those who are new to writing, especially, often feel obligated to qualify their opinions. "I don't really know enough about poetry to critique this," you might be tempted to say. "I found this really confusing… but maybe it was just me." Have faith in yourselves, dear Slammers! You don't need a Ph.D. in literature to respond thoughtfully and constructively to any piece of writing. Writers write for an audience, and you are a bona fide member of that audience -- here on The Slam, and whenever you read a magazine article or pick up a book. There's no need to preface your suggestions with "This is just my opinion…" Because that is exactly what our Slammers are looking for: your opinion, upfront and honest, straight from the source. Your critiques don't have to sound like scholarly analysis to be useful; if they are honest, realistic, and specific, they will be invaluable.

A good critic is hard to find. But here on The Slam, talented critics are posting their thoughts every day. If you are an author on The Slam, take a close look at the responses your work receives, and try to identify what makes the best ones so helpful. Then return the favor, and post critiques of your own! If you haven't yet had a Slammable featured, hone your skills by responding to others' pieces -- you'll be surprised at how much the critiquing process can improve your own work, and your sense of what makes good writing tick. After all, The Slam is a collaborative community. Only by taking part at all levels -- as writer and reader, critiquer and critiqued -- can you help to make that community the best that it can be.

Cheers,

Ann Pedtke
Slam Master