Who do you listen to when seeking reviews?
I’m lucky, unlike many writers or want-to-write-ers, I have a group of people that can be well written. Not all of us are gifted in composition analysis, or rhetoricians, but we all have someone we listen to.
I was told, by a peer, that even Steven King has a group of people he passes his writings along to. I tend to want a more seasoned hand reviewing my work, and that too can be a troublesome road to travel. I think it’s better if we obtain input from people we like and respect than just a random set of fans. For instance, instead of seeking approval or input from a story I may post up here on this blogg, I would seek that input from people I interface directly with. It’s not to say that those people reading my stories don’t have critiques that are valid, they most certainly do. But what they don’t have is a knowledge of me, I don’t know them, and therefore can’t trust their input.
It is valuable to get input from other writers, friends, and family. Just make sure the input you get is from the source you want.
Cracked Planet 
Title: I don’t want it.
Comments from those who are destructive also prove useful. If my nemesis wanted to critique my writing, I would of course say yes. Let us examine Sherlock and Moriarty. The person most qualified to critique Holmes is this man. “Well played Sherlock, but you failed to include the fact of the pollen from the rare plant” ~Moriarty
“Ah, my good fellow. But I did.”
“Yes, but when….”
And so the critique continues. Our most hated kinsman is the perfect critic. His fault finding mission will take minutiae and exaggerate it. All we have to do is realize the character of this person and grow from the attack.
LikeLike
In writing our trusted critiques are not truely attacking us, or our writing. Thry are simply pointing out what they see, an error in their eyes. So, as harsh as it may seem it isn’t truely an attack.
LikeLike