First, a confession: I have never handled criticism well. Positive feedback quickly fades from my memory, while negative feedback burrows deep into my psyche and slowly gnaws at my core insecurities, leaving me hollow and soul-sick. I certainly experienced critical comments in connection with short fiction in the past, and I coped. But when I recently published my first novel - despite the many warnings that I needed to prepare for brutal reviews, something every writer experiences - I wasn't adequately "hardened." A novel is such a commitment of blood and sweat, I wasn't ready for the tears.

I had heaved a sigh of relief as a handful of positive reviews showed up for the novel on Amazon and Goodreads (discounting the ones from friends). Then I joined a writers' review group, where we reviewed other rookie novelists' works without any chance of reciprocity. The first review from a fellow writer was candid but diplomatic, offering some positive comments that allowed me to salve my wounds. The second steamrolled me: it was unrelentingly critical. Worst of all, I sensed the "truthiness" (with all due credit to Stephen Colbert) in many of the complaints, which touched upon some of my deepest, most secret fears of writerly inadequacy. Ouch.

I'd love to be able to say that I rolled with these criticisms, immediately shrugged them off and refocused my efforts on writing a better book the next time around. I didn't. For a couple of days, I was utterly devastated and disconsolate, second-guessing my work on a sequel to the first novel, which was intended to be part one of a trilogy. What was the point? A few things saved me. First, my better half (cliche, but accurate - my wife is my most trusted confidante, first reader, and first editor) told me to chill and take a few days off, to gain perspective before I made any rash decisions. Second, two wonderful Goodreads members happened to post gracious reviews a few days after the "self-confidence bunker buster" hit.

But then, with a bit more balance in my perspective, I acknowledged a hard truth that many, many veterans had warned me about before this first novel hit the virtual shelves. Fiction reading is a highly subjective experience. Nobody - not even the brilliant writers who have inspired me for decades and whom I hold in awe - pleases every reader. Even the classics occasionally get dissed on Amazon.

So I resolved to take the critical feedback I had received from expert sources (fellow writers) and channel it into redoubling my efforts to do better with the next installment in the trilogy. If a comment resonated with my own deep-seated feelings about areas I need to work on, I considered it carefully when revisiting my work in progress. If a comment seemed off-base, and clashed with other feedback from general readers (non-friends), I ignored it. Honestly, when the dust settled, I felt better. The criticism reinforced lessons I should already have learned, shone a light on dim aspects of my fiction where I knew in my heart that I needed to refine my craft.

So are negative reviews pleasant? Hell, no. Are they useful? I would have to say, after careful consideration: hell, yes. No pain, no gain, right? As a newbie novelist, I'm gaining on it, one psychic trauma at a time!

Have some of you had similar epiphanies while ruminating over negative reviews? How did you use them to advantage? I'd love to hear your war stories!

#SFWApro