When Friends Ask for Feedback

Friends often ask me for feedback on something they have written - anything from a short story to an in-depth article to chapters of a novel or a detailed grant proposal. The first thing I ask before I agree to critique their work is what they are expecting? Is it a brief critique, a deep-dive edit, proofing just for grammar and spelling, or a quick general impression. I don’t mind. It gives me a chance to see someone else's writing process. Here are some tips on how to critique a friend's writing...and still keep the friend.

Guidelines for Giving Feedback

These are the five guiding principles I use when giving constructive criticism to a friend, colleague, or anyone who asks for feedback on something they have written.

1. Be honest, thoughtful , and kind - never reactive, severe, or black-and-white.

2. Give your opinion as a reader; avoid critical (fault-finding) comments - I found this scene a bit top-heavy instead of You used too many adjectives.

3. Edit, critique, proofread – make suggestions instead of specifics on how to fix problematic text.

4. When editing, don't change the meaning or intent - if something is unclear, it's best to say so and leave it up to the author to figure it out.

5. Often the writer will be able to see what works or what doesn't, but not both - including both the positives and negatives will make your critique balanced (and useful).

Reading the Manuscript Several Times

Before I critique the story and suggest any changes, I read the manuscript several times The first read-through is to read it like I'm not planning on giving feedback - I'm letting its meaning emerge and taking note of how the story affects me (its emotional impact).

During the second reading, I focus on structure, character development, plot inconsistencies, and style.

I read the manuscript three more times, with breaks in between. I am looking for details, plot and character discrepancies, repetitions, parts of story that show instead of tell, and pieces of information that don’t advance the central theme or add to any subplots.

Editorial Conundrum

My friend’s story was different. The author begins with three questions that are followed by the protagonist describing her surroundings (told in the first person, she’s sitting in a park in a city). After the first reading, I see something different - it’s in my head to start with Rebecca (the main character) and then intersperse the questions, each question a separate paragraph, throughout the first two pages of the story.

I had never felt compelled before to suggest such a drastic revision, but the structural change suggestion persisted through all five readings. I felt that introducing Rebecca first and then discovering along with her that she doesn't know where she is created tension and increased suspense, strengthening the emotional connection between the protagonist and the reader.

Making the Changes

I alternatively read the original version and the rough draft of the writer's story in its new format several times from start to finish. The story seemed more coherent and cohesive. Still, I didn't want to just send it back without some warning.

 I emailed my friend and asked if they were open to the structural changes I had in mind. The answer came back yes.

I cleaned up the edited version and included notes. My general feedback made it clear that I thought the story was well-constructed, kept me engaged, and left me wanting to know more. To my great relief, my friend was happy with the way I had edited their story.