Oh sure they get typos and spelling errors, but they don't generally know how to improve on a phrase/piece or to tell you what is missing.
Added to this is that they don't know how to criticise.
By this I mean actually being helpful in what they say.
Generally, criticising has negative connotations for most people, since it implies that you have done something wrong.
Now in my writing courses what we were taught to do is this:
- What are the Strengths?
- What are the Weaknesses?
- What are the Opportunities?
*** Do I have these right Dorian?
Opportunities are what most people ever hear except that it is all negative. Opportunities appear where there is generally a weakness in the piece or something that the reader/editor feels is missing. This can also include something that is not a weakness but something you think could improve or add to this piece if added or removed.
What you usually hear from people is what you did wrong. You rarely hear about what you did right.
For instance where I am working I handle about seven pages of newspaper. I catch many of my own errors within the writing after several checks.
But of course with this amount of information things fall through the crack. I am not an OCD personality type or anal, I am not that much of a perfectionist, but I do get a large majority.
My proofreader out of thousands of words find 2 to 10 things maybe a week that need correction. Ie neighbor vs neighbour or ".. vs ."
And then all I hear about is the errors I have made. I do not mention to them that I have to go over every change they made to check that they are viable. Often they are corrections that should not have been done in the first place.
I get that it is important to be precise, and each time I do it I get better at it, less and less fall through the cracks.
But I dislike this superior, snobbish attitude these proofreaders get when I make an error. I do not go rubbing it in their faces when I catch them at an error, or when I see all the errors in the rest of the paper.
How are you supposed to learn when you are not shown what you have done well? You are left guessing what is good and all you see is the bad.
I am used to criticism, I was raised on it as a writer. I like it when people tell me what they like, where they think I should give more details, or what they feel isn't right or whatever else they feel about a piece I have written.
What I don't like is purely negative feedback, feedback I can't work with, feedback that makes you feel shot down as if all the work is shoddy crap.
Posts
Great post Marika! Sounds like something Guy would say in our classes.
ReplyDeleteYup, got the list right, and the order. But most people hear about weaknesses and not missed opportunities.
It takes some effort to point out positive points first. But it helps the writer a lot! And it is good practice for real life, to be positive first. It makes one sound less like a whiner. :)