Viewing Single Post From: Lack of Critique

Viewing Single Post From: Lack of Critique
Likur	Apr 29 2009, 03:28 PM
Frogs and Penelope (a title of something yet to come) Posts: 83 Group: Writers+ Member #18 Joined: Apr 20, 2008	I'd like to address the issue of critiquing on this board. Critiquing is *not* one line, "Hey, nice work, this is great," or "I didn't like this – it needs work." There are some people that give okay critiques. But most are not constructive or focused on improving the writer rather than the story. Here are official definitions of "Critiquing:" "n. an article or essay criticizing a literary or other work; detailed evaluation; review." - Dictionary.com "v. to examine critically." - Merriam-Webster "n. a detailed analysis and assessment.." - Oxford Dictionary What's in common with them all? They all mention something about criticism, detailed, analysis, and examining. However, it's not happening enough here. Few are bothering to give a good, thorough critique that will actually help the author become a better writer, rather than tell them you like it and leave a couple comments on their story. The whole point of this site is not to compliment people on their work, it's to make them realize what they could be doing better, and help them not to make the same mistake again. Aside from the lack of useful, constructive critique, people here are also not accepting the critique they’re given. For god’s sake, why the heck did you sign up for a writing board if you don’t want to get better at writing? If it’s a poem or story you don’t want criticized, don’t post it. However, if you want to be a better writer, you have to allow people to tell you that you that parts of your writing are bad. You can’t get better if you’re not bad to begin with. There were writing sites where no one will tell you how fabulous you are at writing, no one will praise you on your work. They’re there to tell you what you did wrong and what you can do to do it right. I found this example of a good, thorough, constructive critique. This is what a crit should be more like: Critique How many times is it mentioned that the author did something good in the whole post? 1,500 words of critique and there’s perhaps one sentence about what is good in the story. That’s because the critique that makes you a better writer is mostly about things to improve. This doesn’t mean that you can’t mention what you really like in the story – that makes it a good story. You just need to trim down on the good and fill it in with improvements. Sometimes a story needs more than one critique. Maybe the author took in the critic’s first set of advice, and after editing it, the same critic found something they didn’t pick up on before, or that was added that took away from the story. One critique isn’t going to make you Shakespeare or Tolkien. In most cases, you need to go back and edit several times before your story is even halfway there. I have a 12 chapter novel that I finished in… when was it? June, 2007. Guess what? I’ve still only edited up to Chapter 3. And I can already tell a lot of things I’m going to want to go back and edit some more on in those three chapters. It’s okay to start out as a crappy writer. Everyone was at some point, if they aren’t still. The whole point of joining a writing board is for other members to shape you up to be a not-so-crappy writer, and then a decent writer, and then a good writer. There are few who progress to being a bestselling author, and if they do, then it takes years and years in order to learn the craft properly and devise a good piece of literature. So please, don’t just brush off a critique with “I don’t need a critique, this is just for fun.” If it’s just for fun, don’t post it. Post things you really want to have critiqued. And don’t give stupid, unhelpful critiques like “Great poem,” or “Great story,” or “Good, it just needs a little work.” If it stinks, let the person know (gently) that it’s not fabulous. Don’t sugar-coat it. Sugar-coating isn’t going to help. Giving a good critique is just as helpful as getting one. When you’re giving a good critique, you notice things in someone else’s work that maybe you do in your own. Then you realize how it looks, and perhaps think twice about leaving it in your work. As you critique you also can get good ideas for imagery, wording, and style that you hadn’t thought of before and really think could work in what you’re writing, or else see elements that are important, which you are leaving out. Two days ago, I was critiquing a story, and I found things that I did, such as flat descriptions that could be made more lively, and wording, that didn’t sound write when read by an unbiased person. Since you’re always biased to your own writing, you’re not going to notice things that don’t work as much as you do in someone else’s work. Reading up on good literature will help you recognize a bad story when you see it. Read some Tolkien, JK Rowling, Neil Gaiman, Stephen King, Jane Austen – some novels at their best. Emily Dickenson and Isis and Terminus (Kids Writing Club – you may need to dig in the back for their work), and Hypocrite and J (Teenage Writers –make sure you’re 13 or older strictly speaking before you enter Teenage Writers). They’re all amazing poets. Oscar Wilde is good for pretty much all of it – short stories, novels (I recommend Dorian Gray), poems (they can be found here), and plays (read the “Importance of Being Earnest” – it’s funny and great at the same time). Also read some less-than-good literature, such as Stephenie Meyer (don’t focus on the story, focus on the writing – you’ll notice a lot of purple prose), Christopher Paolini (dialogue especially, but also prose), Catherine Fischer (plotting, dialogue, characterization), and Jim Thiels (Eye of Argon – the ultimate sci-fi flunk). In the area of bad poetry, James McIntyre, Julia A. Moore, and William McGonagall, said to be the worst poets of Canada, America, and Britain. Read them and you’ll know the meaning of bad poetry. All the swear words in the world cannot describe the monstrosities they’ve created. Edited by Likur, Apr 29 2009, 03:37 PM.
	'People want to know why I do this, why I write such gross stuff. I like to tell them I have the heart of a small boy... ...and I keep it in a jar on my desk.' 'Both Rowling and Meyer, they're speaking directly to young people... The real difference is that Jo Rowling is a terrific writer and Stephenie Meyer can't write worth a darn. She's not very good.' - Stephen King

Lack of Critique · Contribute Your Thoughts