If you are reading this, then chances are you are looking at critiquing, and want to become better at it. Since I've been seeing a lot of people who don't really put out particularly impressive critiques, I thought I'd write a guide to help people critique. This will offer you some advice on how to get better.

First off, there are three types of critiques you can write.

Chapter Critiques

Whole Work Critiques

First Impression Critiques

A lot of people like chapter critiques, although I personally find them to be the most useless critiques. Although I've more recently come to see their importance, especially in the wattpad ranking system. The reason most people like them is that it gives them more comments, and the more comments they get, the faster they rise in the rankings. However, I find a chapter critique to be very limiting. First, you can only really handle the concepts associated with that chapter, and second... some chapters can be really short, with very little actually occurring.

First Impression critiques are used because they are easy for critics (I also call them critiquers) to do. You just have to read a chapter at most, and if it interests you, you tell them, if it doesn't, you tell them that. Boom, done. What I dislike about this is that everyone has a different opinion of what's interesting, so one person's draw is another person's dislike. People can also become very obsessed with their first chapter as a result of receiving mostly impressions, never moving on and writing the rest of the story.

That leaves whole work critiques. This does not necessarily mean you critique the whole work, just up to a certain point. That can be everything they've written so far, the first five chapters, or up to any other point. You post your review on the last chapter you read and that's that. This is really the best way to critique, so if you are going to do it, I'd push for those. However, even whole work critiques have problems, namely, most people won't do them. I might agree to read your first ten chapters, but actually doing it is another story entirely.

In the end, you need to open up dialogue with your critique. They can't be some guy you just pm, follow, and then never speak to again. If you want meaningful advice, you're going to have to talk to them, exchange information, speak about the things you want, etc... Although that's all advice for someone getting a critic. The advice this chapter provides is for someone who wants to critique themselves. Therefore, here are eleven tips to make you a better Critiquer on Wattpad.

You are a Critiquer, and not an editor. "Lots of spelling mistakes and grammar errors" is the most generic, pointless comment and it only serves to fluff up a review. I use it myself, I know its fluff, you know its fluff, quit using it. If you do use it, make sure to have a few examples handy. Remember though, you are NOT an editor. If they wanted it edited, they would be contacting an editor, not you. The only cases it's worth mentioning is when it is so prevalent it breaks up the flow of the story or so apparent it gives you the wrong impression. Otherwise, quit using this, myself included.

It would not be a bad idea to exchange a few emails and ask specifically what the writer is looking for from his critique. Different writers will be looking for different things. I concern myself with the whole picture. Is it good? Are their plot holes? Did anything not make sense? But there are some people out there who little grammar mistakes pointed out as well. Make the distinction and you'll write a better critique.

Look for weaknesses. Look for the things they make a lot of errors on. While I say don't list spelling errors and mistakes... if it's an error they do A LOT, like always misuse they're, their, and there... THAT is a weakness and you can mention it. But once again, don't focus on spelling and grammar. Look at the dialogue... does it flow well? Are the paragraphs well spaced? Does the story make sense?

This may be contradictory to things other people say, but don't hit up genres you hate. You SHOULD go outside your boundaries. You SHOULD try scifi, fantasy, and anything else you're not familiar with. You can provide insights to the book from an outsider point of view that could potentially be very useful. BUT... if all you can say is ... "I don't like this genre, but I suppose it would be good for someone who likes that genre..." then don't waste your time or the writer's time by reading something you can't take on a fundamental level and critique.

Too many people think being a harsh critiquer means being a jerk... or worse, being nitpicky. That is not what this term means. Don't be a jerk. You still have to be nice to people. Don't just list of negatives without a concern or care. Don't be rude. Be polite. Think about how you would talk in real like. Remember polite words and pc words, like "Please", "thank you", ect... You'd be surprised how often a simple polite word here and there can completely change how people perceive your comments. Also, don't nitpick. (look at 10)

Everyone seems to think critique means you have to say negative things about a work, and keep saying bad things. Being a critic isn't just about saying what people did wrong, it's about saying what they did right too. If you are critiquing, you need to see the good things too, because just showing them negatives means they have no clue what they are doing good, and in their quest to try to end all negatives, they will lose the positives no one told them they had.

When you read the book, have a pen and paper handy. Make notes as you read. You are NOT going to remember every single thing that struck you as you read the chapter, just jog a note here and there as you go.

If you're going to do this, and waste your time, you should be able to generate three paragraphs. I think it's a fair commitment. If you're not, don't waste your time or other people's time.

If you make a comment and your critique'd argues some points, listen to him. It will help you grow as a critiquer. YOU are NOT the say all. YOU are NOT RIGHT. You can learn by critiquing just as much as they can. I think too much critiquers are... how do we say... full of themselves. Get off your high horse and realize you are not the New York Times reviewing a recent blockbuster novel, you're a peer trying to give helpful advice to another peer on a work that is almost certainly not completed, or even edited in some cases.

If you really want to critique, stop demanding payments. It's shallow, it's petty, and it makes you look bad. If they offer payment, feel free to tell them how they can repay you. But you are not a professional. Your opinion is not WORTH it. If you want to do a critique for critique... then call it a critique for a critique. Don't act like you are a critic when all you really want is someone to critique your work and trading services.

Please note that I'm saying "demand" and "expect" payment, not "request" payment. The difference runs in their mentality. You can feel like your time is worth a reward and request that reward. However, there is a line that needs to be drawn when that request becomes a demand, and that person stops critiquing because they like doing it and more because they value their payment.

Here's another way of looking at this. A friend comes up to you and recommends you don't read this book because it sucks. A second friend comes up to you and recommends you do read the book because it is like... so good. You find out the second friend was paid $50 to critique the book from the writer. Which friend would you trust more?

That's the problem with paying someone for a critique. The second you give payment, you've biased them. They'll be more inclined to speak positively because, at least to a small extent, they're on your payroll. When someone freely offers you a critique because you asked or they want to, that's great, but the second you turn that into a monetary award system, you've turned their entire critique suspect.

I'm not saying there aren't good critics out there that happen to ask for payments. I'm saying they are exceptionally rare, and the second you start asking for a payment, you're blurring the line between someone doing this for personal enlightenment and fun, and someone doing it for the stars and follows.

If something is contextual, your "advice" is not useful. Think about what you are saying, and whether saying it can actually help them improve. "This was too gory and I hate gore" is a silly comment. They are not going to change because it affects your delicate sensibilities. Now if the comment is "The gore distracted from dialogue and seemed out of place" THAT's a useful comment. But if your complaint is an aesthetic one, keep it to yourself, you end up just annoying them and looking nitpicky.

Entirely too many people give glowing reviews because it "sounds good". I suppose it comes with the age group. No offense, but as a young teen, many of you are probably used to reading things you don't understand. So if it sounds pretty and flowery, you assume it must be good. I like to think at this point in my career I can figure out writing pretty well, and when something doesn't make sense, it doesn't make sense. If you don't understand what the heck is going on, then chances are something is wrong with the story, and you may want to mention it. I've seen people go on for ages with a basically unintelligible book because it sounded pretty and so people kept giving them thumbs up. Don't be one of those people.

So that's it for my advice. Take it to heart if you can. Or at least take what you want out of it. Hopefully it helps someone somewhere become just a little more skilled at what they do, or gives them something to think about.