What is Good Feedback?
And what to disregard
In the artistic world, feedback can be a double-edged sword—or more accurately, a big club to bludgeon one’s work. It can refine and elevate an artist’s work, but it can also dilute originality, stifle creativity, and smash confidence to pieces. This essay explores the complexity of feedback in the artistic process, arguing that artists should be eminently careful in what they choose to listen to in order to protect their originality and integrity.
Good feedback should take into consideration the context first of all. One cannot give feedback to a veteran of a hundred projects in the same way as to a brand-new, fragile artist. Similarly, there are stages in projects; one can’t simply give the same feedback on a just-released film or book as on something in development. Maybe that goes without saying, but how many times haveI seen—even educators in art school—start off after their very first viewing of a final piece, saying, "My question to you is, 'What is it about?'" There is a time and place for such questions, and if feedback is inappropriate for the current stage of your project, I say just utterly ignore it.
Also, be mindful of the ‘first viewing’ effect. Whenever you introduce a new person into a feedback loop, they will find something to criticise; otherwise, they risk appearing useless. I’ve rarely seen someone start out a feedback session and say, ‘All good, keep going.’
The wrong feedback at the wrong stage of a project can totally crush the vision and the confidence of the receiver. I’ve seen it happen many times over. The majority of people mean well, but not always. I’ve also seen groupthink or ‘I scratch your back, you scratch mine’ clique mentality, so beware of highly competitive environments.
Also, personally, I’m always very wary of the loudest and most charismatic person in the room; some folks like the sound of their own voice a lot.
Another type of damaging feedback is when people try to rewrite your piece for you or completely disregard your style and vision. Being talented doesn’t mean being able to give feedback, let alone nurture someone else’s talent. It’s just not the same skill set, it requires psychology and the ability to listen. And, of course, ignoring feedback from people who simply don’t like you or your work is crucial.
I have seen it said on this platform that one should always listen to their editor, or trust their beta readers. I think going in with such an outlook can lead to confusion and a loss of confidence. You cannot indiscriminately listen to everyone; if putting as many talented people in a room as possible produced glorious outcomes, then there would be nicer shows on TV these days.
I think anything that questions the vision or goes against it should be ruthlessly dismissed. Anyone trying to trigger a reaction from you is playing power games and should be ignored with no emotion at all, and most importantly, anything that isn’t concrete and actionable should also be dismissed.
I basically feel that in 90% of cases, we are right about what we create. It’s only in the remaining 10% where we need to identify and solve issues in order to produce successful work.
Across all the films I’ve made, those that are, in general, the most successful tend to be the ones where I didn’t listen too much to external opinions and just followed my vision to the end. Those where I got confused in overdoses of feedback (film school) or worse had the vision questioned too many times early in the process produced the least successful results.
I’m not trying to draw conclusions from my own experience here; it’s more about using myself as an example to advocate for slightly more character and ego in creators and an end to people preying on others' insecurities and making themselves indispensable.
I wouldn’t advise anyone to always listen to their editor; I would rather they listen to the right feedback no matter where it comes from and feel strong enough to dismiss feedback that isn’t helping the vision.
It’s of course tempting to change something to please the right people (executives in film or agents/publishers in publishing), but if it goes against the vision, it should be ruthlessly discarded.
When starting a new project, I create a ball of confidence around the core idea, ensuring it's well-defined and reinforced. Later in the process, as feedback floods in, this core will be challenged. I build this emotional confidence over time and guard it fiercely against any attacks.
What about you? How do you deal with feedback and criticism in your process?
As a former professor of English and current editor and writing coach, I find that there are some writers who simply cannot stop asking people for feedback until they reach a point of paralysis because they have so many disparate opinions about what they're written. I share any work-in-progress only with my spouse, who is an excellent editor as well as a writer too, and also with my former college writing mentor because we're in touch on a regular basis. Nobody else sees it until it's published. I trust their judgment, have found it very smart and incisive over the years, and neither one has ever been trying to score points by being clever at my expense. Their input has helped fuel my career.
You won’t believe this but I’m at Oxford doing a creative writing course and today we were talking about feedback and what is helpful when giving it. So many of your points came up! I’m compiling a list of Substacks to share with everyone at the end of the week for guidance on how Substack can be a tool to help them develop the habit of writing and connecting to other writers/creators for support and feedback and this post couldn’t have been more timely!