The simple truth about writers is this: they are total attention whores. They live for reviews. To validate their work is a compliment of the highest accord. Sure, some authors state they don't care about reviews, that they write for their pleasure alone and aren't interested in what others think ... but that's not true. If it were, then what would be the point of publishing?  Why place your story out there for others to share and enjoy if it was written for you?

Not even the greatest writer in the world can completely satisfy their entire audience. There will always be that 'but' thrown in with the praise, that 'however' statement which dampens the euphoria of having people relate to your work. It's inevitable ... but it's not evil. In fact, despite what many writers may believe, a negative review can actually be better than one overflowing with empty praise.

If a Negative Review is so Good, Why Does it Suck to Get it?

Writing is a very personal endeavor. It not only tells a story but gives readers insight into who the writer is as a person: their thoughts and ideals, what they value in society and what they don't, what they fear and love. No matter how dissimilar the characters and their world are to the creator, it's impossible for an author to completely separate his or her self from the pages. This is why it can be very difficult to have your work analyzed by others. They are essentially picking you apart piece by piece. No one in their right mind would ever enjoy that.

It's almost a prerequisite that a writer has to have a tiny masochistic streak in them in order to continue doing what they do: willingly offering up the product of their intellectual labor for an audience to dissect and derive meaning from.

Okay, So How do I Make Lemonade Out of These Lemons?

The trick to handling negative reviews is not, as the saying goes, to develop a thicker skin. That would imply being impenetrable, which no writer should ever be. By being unreceptive to critiquing, a writer is not only disvaluing the opinion of the reader but also stagnating his or hers potential for growth.

Instead, a writer should be open to all forms of review, not just the ones they wish to hear. By doing this, they get a more comprehensive feel for how their audience perceives their work. Limiting input to only that which is agreeable is creating a falsely bias look at your own work. It's not only disingenuous to the story and yourself but it's also disrespectful to your readers. You are, in a sense, stating that unless they agree with you, their opinion doesn't matter.

Does That Mean I Have to Listen to EVERY Review I Get?

This doesn't mean that every review received should be considered a viable means of improvement. It's ultimately up to you, the author, to determine the full merit of the review. Someone who leaves a note saying, 'lol, this sucked' isn't being particularly helpful. What about the story sucked?  Was it the style?  The topic?  The characters?  If there's no real substance to the negative review, then it's not one that needs to be considered seriously.

The same is true for the ambiguous positive reviews. If all the reader says is, 'nice job, keep it up' ... what was nice about it?  Was it the clever use of imagery?  The dialogue?  Were there areas that could have been improved so that it was more than just nice?  It's impossible to know what it is that the reader found appealing about your work if they don't mention it. How else can you 'keep it up' if you don't know what you're supposed to be keeping up with?

But... It's MY Story!  Won't Reading Reviews Alter My Vision?

There are several arguments against reading negative reviews. For one, there's the possibility that it could influence the you write it. You might change the storyline a little because several readers said they didn't like a certain element of the plot, or it might discourage you from writing anything else to begin with because of the negative responses. There's also the reality that, again, some reviewers are not exactly the most polite when it comes to pointing out flaws. And of course there's the fact that, hey, the story is already out and being read, so what's the point of fixing the mistakes?

At the same time though, negative reviews can be a writer's best friend. They can point out potential plot holes before they occur, thus giving the author time to repair them for a more solid, completed story. Perhaps one character's personality is getting a little too obnoxious in comparison to the rest of the cast. A negative review pointing this out can curb that before the character becomes completely unlikeable. And sometimes, if you're evil like me, having a reader predict your storyline will prompt you into tweaking it just a little so as to keep everyone on their toes. There's really nothing more enjoyable than making the reader's jaw drop at an unforeseen plot twist.

One of the marks of a truly great writer is one who doesn't allow for sloppy work. If there's a misplaced comma or the sentence structure is a bit off, they'll want to know so they fix it. Firstly, it's unprofessional for a professional writer to have those mistakes in their finished work. Secondly, it's all about the reader. While most won't miss a comma here or there, if the sentence structure is unnecessarily complex the meaning is lost and you in turn lose your audience. So, the argument that the story has already been published and therefore doesn't need correcting is just sheer laziness. True, you can't recall every single book just to fix one comma, but you can apply the knowledge gained to future work.

As far as negative reviews hindering the creative process -- this falls back on the writer and how much merit they put behind the review. There's a distinct difference between constructive criticism and being flamed, and that's a very important distinction for a writer to realize.

What's the Difference Between a Flame and Constructive Criticism?

A flame review is like the 'lol, this sucks' example provided above: no real content or examples of where the work failed, no comments or advice on how to improve. Any review that attacks the author on a personal level ("die now, you idiot"), is unnecessarily snarky ("way to slice and dice the English language") or doesn't observe polite speech and common courtesy is a flame and is, therefore, not worth your time to read, respond to or even think about. By paying any attention to a flame, you are acknowledging that what the person said affected you. They weren't trying to be helpful to you, so you don't owe them a response of any kind -- not even a note telling them to shove off.

In comparison, constructive criticism is much different. It's typically done in a respectful manner and strikes a fairly even balance between the negatives and the positives. A reviewer who points out that the distribution between dialogue and description is uneven isn't trying to flame you. They are trying to help you better your story. People who take the time to pinpoint the flaws and offer suggestions for improvement are doing so because they enjoyed the story (and by extension your writing style) and want it to go from being good to being exceptional. They believe in you as well as your writing abilities and want to see you succeed in perfecting both.

However, it's entirely up to you, the author, on whether you take them up on the offer advice or not.

What Should I do for the Future?

The next time someone gives a "negative" review for your story, don't disregard it simply because they don't agree with you. Read through it carefully. Determine whether the reviewer is just being rude or if what they're suggesting is accurate. It's through our mistakes that we learn and better ourselves. Sometimes, it takes an outsider's perspective in order for us to notice those tiny flaws. Instead of labeling all the comments that aren't praising you as being flames, maybe try thanking the people who did take the time to really read your work -- because those people truly are your biggest fans.

Resources:

1. Lee, Emma Should Writers Read Reviews of Their Writing?   http://emmalee1.wordpress.com/2008/09/14/should-writers-read-reviews-of-their-writing/

2. Authors Reading Authors http://www.goodreads.com/group/show/8523.Authors_Reading_Authors

3. Jackson, Dawn How to Take a Negative Review With Grace http://www.thegalaxyexpress.net/2009/07/how-to-take-negative-review-with-grace.html

Quick end note:  That last article in particular is very well written. MUCH better than what I've done here.