IS IT SAFE TO LOOK AT THE MOON?

The Art of Critiquing

What is the best way to critique an art of work without sounding as if the critiquer's intention is to critic instead of encourage?

I have joined quite a number of critique groups and some writers are just not accepting the fact their work needs revising. There is always that feeling of "no, my work is exceptional; and who are you to critique my work?"

I believe for a person to critique someone else's work, that person should know the rules and etiquette of critiquing. There are occasions when we receive a bad critique, and the first reaction we have is to get angry. Maybe some critiquers are really out to discourage, to inflict the same bad critique as they got for their work. It is understandable when we react to a bad critique, but maybe the first thing we should do is to look at our work again, pretend we are critiquing someone else's work, and with a clear conscience, reread our work. It is rather difficult to do that if we are angry, of course. So, what is the best thing to do?

In the world of writing, a critique to one's work is the best that can happen to a writer. We look at what we have written and critiquers have a different idea; therefore, we take in the critique, examine our work through the eye of the critiquer, and be glad someone wants to read our work!!! Can you imagine if no one would like to read our work?