Many moons ago, as an art major, I learned quickly to take criticism and sort it into categories. Constructive, where even though the words may be extreme, it helped me grow. Destructive, where the critic tossed venom without any explanation of the opinion: therefore no chance for me to learn. I soon thought of this type of review as worthless so treated it as such even though the words stung. Then there were the panderers. The comments that are filled with fluff but offer no reasons for the kind words. They make you feel good but a good critic cannot be afraid of hurting somebody’s feelings.
If you have never been critiqued by a classroom of peers, you have never known how it feels to have your creativity torn into the tiniest pieces. I took a photography class once that was brutal but in retrospect, a very positive learning experience.
I carried a full college load while my children were young. They would take turns going to school with me if their vacations did not coincide with mine. My eldest son, then thirteen, went to a watercolor class where the professor took one of my paintings and scaled it across the room. He said, "First, let's get rid of the trash." For me, the hardest part of his comments of a half dozen paintings was keeping my teenager from hitting him. I have used the professor's constructive criticism to guide my painting for years and will again - if I ever find the time to do more watercolors.
Now in my seventies, I believe I have figured out what I want to be when I grow up and the years of comments about my creative works will do me in good stead with my writing. I have been very fortunate since many reviews have been positive and included reasons for the uplifting words. There have been a few that I did not understand as I needed a ‘why’. There have been some that found negatives that I did not agree with and that is okay as long as I have my reasons. If everyone felt the same, the world would be a very boring place.
For example. The young couple Ben and Nettie in The Spruce Gum Box started out as children just putting up with each other but as happens, grew close and married. One critic felt their relationship was too pat. I should have given them more problems with each other. Why? I tend to be a positive person and why would I do this? Just to make the reader squirm a bit? I have read some books where I was enjoying the journey when suddenly the author would toss in a sex scene for no other reason than titillation. For me sex and/or violence needs to be written as part of the story and carry some meaning. I tried other books from this author as I knew the name and a bit about her but was very disappointed as the gratuitous sex turned me off and I lost interest in reading her. So why would I toss in problems just for interest in a love story that is still strong in the sequel?
I just have to be me.