Having Thick Skin as an Author: A Few Thoughts

Fair warning: This is a bit of a rant. These are my views as a writer and as someone who used to work as a freelance editor.

A couple of years ago, I had an encounter with an author in which he asked me to review his book and sent me a free digital copy. We'd connected before on social and had interacted multiple times, always friendly. He was aware that I don't believe in not posting reviews below a certain number of stars, as I believe reviews should be honest because they are for readers, not for authors. I rarely post below 3 stars, regardless, and I always try to find something I thought worked well in the book. I don't post scathing, nasty reviews.

I was working as a freelance editor at the time. Their book had been out for a while. I gave it three stars and wrote what I thought was an honest, kind-as-can-be review. I typically try to use the “Oreo cookie” method when I write a review that includes any critique. I start out with positive comments about what I liked and enjoyed about the book, write what I thought needed work in the middle, and end it with another nice comment about things I enjoyed and who would enjoy the book.

My critique was that the writing felt a bit clunky and could have used an editor, as well as finding multiple typos and errors in every chapter. It wasn't a bad book, and I thought the premise was intriguing, but I just felt like it could have used more polishing before being published.

In reaction to the critique, this author posted publicly that he had done his best with the book, that people shouldn’t expect perfection, and that people should still read his books and look past all the errors despite what my review said.

I never said in any part of the review that people shouldn't read the book.

So, here comes my irritated rant.

Most people expect a professional product when they buy a book. If I buy a book with my hard-earned money, I want it to be as close to professional as possible. Yes, there are errors in traditionally published books. I get that sometimes mistakes slip through the cracks in self-publishing too. But to have a book that’s riddled with errors? It makes it difficult for me to read. Do I recognize that not everyone can afford multiple rounds of editors and proofreaders? Of course. I understand some authors have to self-edit until they can afford an editor for future releases. I, myself, can't afford multiple rounds of editors and proofreads. I also do not believe in using AI "tools" like ChatGPT to edit books. Editing should be left in the hands of humans, as should every other aspect of writing and publishing and pretty much in the creative realm.

I recognize that books are created by humans. Humans make mistakes. It happens.

Yes, I agree that perfection is an unattainable goal when it comes to writing. If we only waited for absolute perfection in our writing, we would never be finished. I won’t go into gross detail about why I gave this author fewer than five stars, but I felt the book needed editing. More than just an editor — it didn’t read like it had been revised or edited at all by the author. To me, it read like a first draft. I don't mean this in a harsh or mean way; writing is a craft that takes practice and learning.

I don’t intend to be inconsiderate in any way, shape, or form, which is why I’m not calling anyone out by name. The story had potential. The premise was great. However, the book fell flat (for me, at least) with the multiple errors per chapter and what I felt to be clunky prose, all of which could have been fixed with an editor and some self-revision.

I don’t claim to write perfectly, and I am far from perfect in any aspect of my life. But if we get upset and offended when someone critiques our work, we will never grow as writers. Yes, there will always be critics of your book. No book will ever be perfect, and not every book is meant for every person on the planet. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t put out the best work possible within your means, especially if you are self-publishing.

This is also why thick skin is important if you’re going to publish. Again, there will always be critics. Learn from the critics if you see a common thread. Learn how to fix issues that pop up in beta reader or editor feedback. Replying to criticism by recording a video saying you did your best and to ignore legitimate reviews isn’t going to make them change their minds. It only makes you look petty and defensive. (Am I possibly being petty now? Sure.) Be open to feedback, especially from alpha and beta readers. Learn and grow as a writer.

My writing partner also gives this advice: If you can’t handle bad reviews, don’t look. Thicken your skin if you want to look at your reviews, but I believe reviews are for readers, not the author. That's what editors and beta readers are for. And when it comes to working with an editor or beta readers, learn to be open to critique and feedback. They are there to help you make your book shine, not to insult you or take you down a peg, and critique should never be a personal attack.

Thoughts on having thick skin as an author? Leave your thoughts in the comments!