3 ms·
This is an interesting problem. I was a dual English/CompSci major in undergrad, and while CompSci didn't have the notion of critiques, my creative writing clas
by reissbaker 14y ago
This is an interesting problem. I was a dual English/CompSci major in undergrad, and while CompSci didn't have the notion of critiques, my creative writing classes were almost entirely critique-based. Back then, critiques were almost entirely pleasant and useful. When critiquing product — or even doing code reviews — now, though, it often feels more confrontational.
I wonder how my English professors did it: they fostered an environment where even though you may have slaved away for nights on your short story, it was alright when someone pointed out the flaws. Because critique is really important for creating good products, whether those products are apps or websites or code or short fiction. I don't regret ever giving positive feedback, but I still do sometimes regret flaws in launched products. Could an early critique have made things go another way?
I think at least part of why critiques worked so well in my creative writing classes was the strong notion of authorship, and ownership — that you could give your critique, but if the author disagreed, they were the author and in control of the voice. In professional writing it can be different — your editor can certainly force changes, with more or less control depending on the industry — but even there, a lot of control is left to the writer: the editor might say a section needs work, but even if they suggest changes they'll generally allow writers control over phrasing.
Part of the problem might also be power dynamics: critiques in a professional environment can come across as self-serving, or gunning for a promotion, or as being enforced from the top. Is there a way to separate the critique from the critic?
I don't know how to recreate my old English classrooms yet but I want to. Positive feedback is important to create a healthy work environment, but if you can't highlight problems then how will anyone consider fixing them?
- gingerlime 14y agoThat's very interesting. The difference I see between writing/writers and programming/programmers is that, and please correct me if I'm wrong, writers tend to work alone whereas programmers build code as a team. So if I'm reviewing a pull request, it's code that's going to enter the shared codebase, and touching code of others on the team. It's not the same as reviewing someone's independent work, completely separate from my own. I do wonder however about creative writing environments, where more than one person is involved. One example I can think of (but have very limited knowledge about) is comedy scriptwriting. I've heard it's usually a team of writers that works on a sitcom. I wonder how they work together constructively, and if there are lessons to be learned from those kinds of environments. Or perhaps the same problems exist there as there are in technology, where egos and timelines are involved...
- reissbaker 14y agoThat's a good point — it's a lot easier to give dispassionate negative feedback if the person's work isn't directly tied to your own. And it's a lot easier to view negative feedback as helpful rather than confrontational when it's dispassionate.