Workshops – III. How to Critique a Manuscript

For workshops, the opportunity to critique a student manuscript should improve the reviewer’s skills as a literary fiction writer as well as provide feedback to the author. Here are suggestions for learning and making maximum use of time spent. You are not a teacher grading a student assignment, and you are not expected to be an expert in creative writing (you wouldn’t be taking the course). Many critiques by fellow students are never read, or at least taken seriously, by authors. So critique primarily for your learning experience.


Multiple readings are necessary. The first should be a straight through reading for effectiveness of story and prose style. Only on subsequent readings should analysis begin. Consider marking a copy of the manuscript for your use. Then as the final stage of critique, mark the manuscript that will be returned to the author only with carefully selected comments.


  1. Can you summarize the story in one or two sentences. If not, why not? With a good story there should be no struggle.
  2. Is there a clear beginning, middle and end? Does the story start in the right place, both for the time line and for delivery of story content in the most effective way? Does the story end so that the conflict essential to every story is resolved satisfactorily. Is the middle focused and well paced?
  3. List characters. Identify protagonist and antagonist (antagonist does not have to be another character and may be environment, conscience, fate, etc.). Identify major conflicts and resultant actions. Are they reasonable and interesting?
  4. Are, at least the major, characters easily visualized and are their actions based on a strong core desire (essential for meaning)?
  5. What is the ratio of in-scene, dramatic development, and narrative telling, and are these elements in proper balance?
  6. Is there drama–that is conflict, action, and resolution–or is the story static?


  • Evaluate improvements in: word choice, syntax, sentence and paragraph structure.
  • Could you use metaphor and simile more effectively?
  • How would you speed up or slow down the pacing?
  • Could you write key narrative passages in-scene, or in the moment?
  • How would you improve a representative sample of dialog?


Things to avoid in critique for the author.

  • Don’t comment on spelling and grammar errors (just note them).
  • Don’t give subjective opinions about characters (any comment that might come from a dislike of men, for example, or revulsion at the indulgences of alcoholism as a nondisease.)
  • Don’t allow comments that, because of sloppy wording, seem catty or mean.
  • Don’t allow comments based on lack of knowledge (common in narration and POV observations).
  • Provide positive comments about something that pleases you, but don’t be dishonest.
  • Don’t micromanage the author’s effort. If you are prone to this, as most of us are, force yourself to stay away from fastidiousness. Detailing your minutia has little chance of helping the author to higher levels of writing.
  • Do not make suggestions that imply restructuring story unless supported by solid, reasonable changes. And do not restructure a story you wish were on the page; limit your comments to story on the page.
  • Avoid the temptation to line edit.
  • Don’t gush. Nothing is more demeaning than insincerity.
  • Be prudent but don’t provide insufficient feedback for the author. And revealing the effects of story on you is better than uneducated criticism.
  • Provide more observations rather than corrective actions, although both can be helpful.
  • Temper harsh wording on draft to be returned to the author.
  • Be specific. Avoid “This works” comments, which are abstract. Better would be “For me, dialog contributed to characterization here. Neat!”


You are not the teacher, and the whole current concept of requiring student feedback on fellow students’ writings borders on unfair, and is presumptuous, at least. Use your reading time for your own learning but don’t feel a need for a competitive performance for best critique is essential. No one cares, for the most part. And some stories simply are not well enough written to be critiqued by amateurs, even on the this-works-for-me level. Let the workshop leaders, who are paid and hopefully experienced, do their job. Make comments on manuscripts when it feels comfortable, but don’t strain.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

5 thoughts on “Workshops – III. How to Critique a Manuscript

  • Ellen Skagerberg

    I work in a bookstore, so friends sometimes ask me to look at a MS. I don’t like to do it, since my basis for comparison is books that have won the National Book Award or the Man Booker Prize! But a dear friend asked me to look at her MS, and I agreed to do it, then wondered how I could provide helpful feedback on her amateur effort. Dear Google pointed me to your page, and the process you’ve outlined here is so helpful, since I want to be honest while still encouraging her efforts. Many thanks!

  • Gaye

    Thanks for the clear way you’ve broken down the critiquing process. The most significant part for me is about avoiding line-editing while you look at the structure and remembering not to micro-manage. “Provide more observations than corrective actions.” – Superb action-oriented advice on how not to do the above. Many, many thanks for these insights. They have come to me as I am wrestling with a particularly long manuscript.
    Best wishes

  • Miranda Cameron


    Thanks for the clear manner of critique presented in this article. Of course, I appreciated it on several levels. I like what is shared on this site. I have so much to learn and so little time to gather it all. Thanks for the gift of your knowledge.