By redrider6612
I’m new to this site, but not new to reviewing. I have over a year of reviewing—and editing—experience in the fanfic world, so I feel fairly well qualified to post this little, um…let’s call it an essay. I hope I don’t offend too many people with what I’m about to say. Reviewing can be very time consuming. Mind you, I’m not complaining. I really enjoy reading and reviewing stories, especially when the author appreciates my comments. I firmly believe honesty is very important, and I try hard to strike a balance between the positive and the negative in my reviews. Most of the authors here have responded well to my reviews, and quite a few have been very warm in their appreciation. Here’s my first problem. There are some authors who don’t really want reviewers to point out the errors in their work. They respond negatively, or not at all, to my detailed reviews—reviews, I might add, that I put a lot of thought and time into writing. Some have even offered excuses for all the SPAG I found. To those writers, I say this: remember when you joined the site, you were warned “that reviews are in public and may be critical.” It shouldn’t surprise you to receive detailed criticism. I understand that some people post their writings here as a catharsis. They seem to need to express their thoughts and feelings and share their experiences with faceless strangers, but they don’t want to hear about the possible flaws in their piece. There’s nothing wrong with that, but I would like to offer some suggestions, if that is the case. First, when you are preparing to submit a piece, you can select the option not to accept reviews. Second, you could include a note that you wrote the piece as a catharsis and aren’t interested in improving the work. Third, put a note in your profile—which I always read—that you aren’t posting your work on the site with the goal of improving your writing. By doing one (or a combination) of these things, you will cut down on the number of reviews you get pointing out your SPAG. You may even get more stars from reviewers, though probably not from me. I review based on the quality of the writing, in addition to content and I don’t believe in compromising my standards for anyone. I’m sorry if that seems harsh, but let me explain why. The purpose of the review stars is to provide readers on the site with an accurate rating system so they can find the ‘good stuff’ quickly. When reviewers reward sloppy writing with more stars than is warranted, the story gets a false positive standing. I don’t know about anyone else, but I get irritated when I click on a story that is rated high over all and find that it is riddled with SPAG, poorly formatted, and/or has major plot problems. I’m honestly puzzled by reviewers who reward poor writing four or five stars. I don’t believe you’re doing the writer any favors by ‘shining them on’ as I call it. How will they know they need to improve? Wouldn’t an honest review, pointing out SPAG and giving suggestions for improvement, be more helpful? Personally, I would much rather get a review that pointed out problems and gave helpful suggestions over a review full of praise. One problem with giving a piece more stars than it deserves is that it cheapens the praise you have given to other more worthy works. Here's an example. Suppose you read one of my pieces and give me five stars and tell me how great it was, how much you enjoyed it, etc. Then you give an inferior piece five stars and tell the writer how great it was and how much you enjoyed it. If I read that comment after reading the inferior piece, I would wonder if the review you gave me was honest. I’ve discovered there is a benefit to always being honest in reviewing. You get a reputation for being a straight shooter, so to speak. On the Bones forum where I got my start, writers knew that I would always tell them what I really thought. I always gave pointers on how they could improve, carefully balanced with encouragement. Writers actually sought my opinion, sending me PMs asking me to read their stuff and give them my thoughts. They knew if I said their story was outstanding, I wasn’t just ‘shining them on’. By the way, I always read through my review a few times to make sure I convey my thoughts properly. I try very hard not to offend with my comments, though I have failed at times, resulting in some rather nasty responses. I've even been scolded by other forum members for being too picky. In conclusion, I would like to say I love this site. I have gotten a lot more incisive, helpful suggestions to improve my writing over the last three weeks than I did over the course of an entire year of writing fanfic. The people here have been very nice and encouraging, and I want to thank everyone for their wonderful feedback. I look forward to hearing more from you all, and I really look forward to reading everyone’s works.
| Author Notes |
I originally wrote this just weeks after joining the site.
For those who don't know, SPAG is shorthand for "Spelling, Punctuation And Grammar". Also, fanfic is fiction written by the fans of a TV show. I discovered fanfic in January of last year when I became a huge fan of the show "Bones" and discovered a forum for the show. |
By redrider6612
| Author Notes | I hope this piece gives reviewers the guts to give honest feedback. Lets do everything we can to make this a great place to learn about writing. NOTE: I don't mean to imply that 5s and 6s shouldn't be given. :) |
By redrider6612
As a student of the 1950s to 1960s Tioga, Louisiana, public schools, my academic grades were based on a much different computation than the ones in use today. The grading scale was: A =100-95, Excellent; B = 90-94, Good; C = 80-89, Average; D = 75-79, Passing; F = Below 75, Failing. That's a pretty stringent bar when compared to the register used to measure my grandchildren's educational journey. Indeed, some schools give a passing grade to students who have demonstrated a knowledge of only sixty percent of the material presented, and others limit the early school years to mile markers such as: consistent, progressing and needs improvement -- none of which will prevent promotion to the next level. Even so, the educational system provides an atmosphere where motivated minds can become learned individuals.
I recently read an article on the management of employees born in the 1980's. The gist of the piece was that those young people grew up "winning" trophies for mere participation. The author suggested such workers respond best when given unique treats for the most minor of accomplishments and special recognition for an adequate performance. I thought that was the purpose of a paycheck!
My point is that the world has changed on the basic levels, and the fanstory writing community is populated by a variety of aspiring authors from all eras and backgrounds. Still, I believe there is common ground from which to approach reviewing every author's handicraft. I put on my reviewer's hat with the following thoughts in mind.
1. The writing presented is the author's best effort.
2. The author sincerely wants to improve his/her writing skills.
Good reviewing takes a lot of time, and I will not waste mine on a piece that does not meet those two standards. The first one is much easier to judge than the second. A post filled with misspelled words is not one I have time to read. Of course, I'm not talking about a typo here and there. I'm referring to massive misspelling reflecting a lack of respect for the reader. If little or no effort has been expended in creating a plausible work, one I can understand, then there's inadequate basis for me to offer an opinion. If the knowledge of the English language is atrocious, I'll probably pass on reviewing, though I have slogged through some pretty far out syntax and gruesome grammar because the story was so good I could not put it down. Authors with that kind of innate talent deserve a chance.
The second standard is more difficult to get a handle on than the first. Assigning three or four stars to some potentially good authors can be as detrimental as giving them the undeserved five or six. For me, the trick is to couch that three or four star rating in an opportunity for upgrade. I am honest in my accolades and my criticism. If either is false, I've done a disservice to myself and the author, but there is no need for a heavy-handed approach. For instance, if it is true, I'll say the premise of the piece earned five stars, but the presentation discounted the excellence. Then I offer specific examples of what could be done to improve the presentation. Sometimes I can see no logical progression from the beginning to the end, and I tell them where I got lost. Again, I give distinct samples of what I considered shortcomings. Every appraisal is balanced by approval of whatever areas earn compliments. And, I always, always invite the author to respond to a less than five star rating. Maybe there's something I don't understand, something he was going for that I missed.
This is particularly true when it comes to poetry because I have not yet reached the toddler stage as a poet. My total foundation for most poetry reviews is how it made me feel and if I enjoyed the experience. The fanstory poets that I regularly review are aware of my limitations, and I share that information with the ones I see less often. With that knowledge, they can better interpret my fours, fives and sixes. I would be hesitant to offer a review on any poem I felt deserved a three star rating. My poetry reviewing credentials are not such to support a truly technical review.
The converse is true for essays and short stories. I have some proficiency in these areas, and I'm more likely to make suggestions for improvements. I also eagerly encourage suggestions from my peers for my own posts. I enjoy healthy discussion because of the opportunity it gives me to learn. When my work receives anything less than a five-star rating without explanation, I request one. When I give less than a five-star rating, I include an explanation and offer another review for any editing or justified reasoning response from the author.
Then I have my fan list, a group of authors whose work I read for pure enjoyment. They write well, submit posts on a variety of topics that interest me and reading their work substitutes for the time I might spend on magazines or other periodicals. It's a rare, rare occurence that any of my fan list authors post less than five-star rated work. I may make suggestions for verb tense changes, note some spag issues or suggest a syntax misstep, but the whole of the work is excellent. Our kinship allows me to give the five stars even if errors exist because those authors, like me, take great pride in their work. They will seriously consider my thoughts and use them as appropriate to improve their piece.
I don't review solely for money, but I do take a look at those things listed on the first two pages, especially any having received an exceptional rating from someone. Again, I have a finite amount of time available to expend in pleasure reading, and a substantial portion of it is consumed here on fanstory.
The "Up Next" reviewing can be much like opening a grab bag. Sometimes there's a diamond to be found, and sometimes only a glass button greets the buyer. For this portion of my reviewing, I employ what I call my one-third rule, i.e. if I've read one-third of the piece, and it has said nothing to me, I hit the "Skip" indicator and move on. Still, the two standards listed earlier are foremost in my mind.
In a nutshell, I believe we all have particular skills to share with our writing peers and various relationships to support and encourage. Some may concentrate on technicalities, while others read for the meat of the story only. Some posts lend themselves to certain types of reviews, i.e. a political rant engenders more emotional response than attention to the ABCs of writing. Others draw us into the characters' minds and situations, fostering a look at dialogue, descriptive phrases, etc. We all pay our dime and get our lollipop. We tend to gather in groups of common ambitions. There's an educational experience to be shared in the fanstory writing community, and how well we use our opportunity to improve our craft is up to each of us.
My goals as a reviewer are to: Be kind, be consistent, be honest and make an authentic effort to learn both from the reviews I write and those I receive.
| Author Notes | This is a contest entry requiring an essay regarding my approach to fanstory reviewing. Let me know what errors you see! Thanks. ann |
By redrider6612
This is not going to be a comprehensive essay on everything one needs to do in order to review poetry as I would not presume to be in the position to write that essay.
My views are impressions taken from my two months at Fan Story and offer nothing more or less than opinions based on my experience. Please take from them what seems of value and discard what goes against your better judgment.
As a poet, the first thing I respond to on a visceral level when reading a review is if the reviewer seems to have "gotten" what I had to say. Whether I am told the reader has experienced similar joys or has taken away from my piece some sort of reflection matters a great deal to me. Most poets, I believe, write to connect to their audience on a deeply human level, and so to know we have been "heard" makes all the difference. If a reviewer agrees or disagrees with me matters not, just so he or she has responded on some emotional or intellectual level.
If this does not occur, if the reviewer jumps immediately to telling me what syllable of what line of what verse was accented wrong, I go into defensive mode.
Please do tell me what word did not fit the mood of the rest of the poem or what line broke with the established rhythm, but if that is all you tell me, I start wondering why in the world I failed so terribly in making you feel or think. I have received reviews, not many I'm glad to report, where the reviewer never mentioned at all what the poem was about. I have received some, not quite as stilted, which say something like, "Nice discussion of fairies" and then launch into two paragraphs of critique of metering and rhyming, never to mention a fairy again.
It is a matter of balance. Yes, as a writer I do welcome any advice as to technique and style, but technique and style are employed for one reason and one reason only, to enhance what a poem has to say. The poem rhymes or flows in service of the content. I've yet to meet a poet who wrote solely in order to get the form right. Poetry is not an intellectual exercise in meeting the challenges of a form. It is using a form that allows the words to sing.
Another issue that arises when I read reviews is that some people would impose their preferences for one form or stylistic choice over another on the poets they review. I have seen this in reviews of other poets in addition to reviews of my own work. One poet, not I, clearly labeled her work a villanelle, which requires the repetition of certain lines in a given pattern. The reviewer docked a star because he does not like repetition. It is clear that person should never then write a villanelle or pantoum or triolet, but neither should he review them if he is automatically going to grouch at any repetition. It is certainly conceivable that a poet's use of repetition did not work well in one of these forms, and then the reviewer should point out which line did not work, but one can't tell another writer to stop using a form altogether.
My first experience with this problem arose when reviewers pointed out to me each instance of rhyming that was not exact in nature - when I would rhyme roam and lone, for instance. Again, if my near rhyming does not work at times and seems off in a particular line, please let me know. But do not impose on me a requirement that all my rhymes be exact rhymes every time I write as if they were errors otherwise. I wrote another essay on this site about the issue of rhyming weeks ago where I pointed out that poetry has a grand tradition of poets who have purposely employed near rhymes. To assume my near rhymes are always mistakes to be corrected, with an offer to reread my poem after I correct the errors, is off-putting. A reader who does not ever like near rhymes should, of course, in her own poetry, keep to exact rhymes.
This brings up another issue - please don't review a person's poetry because of what it does not mention. I wrote a humorous story poem of a lazy man who rocked his life away which most readers enjoyed. One reviewer told me he also enjoyed it, but he wished I had written additional verses giving the views of the lazy man's friends and relatives. For this he docked a star. Perhaps his idea was a cute one, but my failure to have the same vision he did of my story did not prevent my poem from being funny and it did not render my story hard to follow or incomplete. If you write a poem about wildflowers in a meadow and write lovely descriptions of buttercups and violets, it is not my place to lower your score because you did not also include a verse about daisies, my favorite flower. I should review you on what you did choose to write about. Should a reviewer prefer a poem about daisies, that person should take pen in hand and write that poem.
Please tell me if my ideas are clear, if they aroused some sort of passion or made you laugh or caused you to reminisce. Please tell me if you were diverted from appreciation of the poem's message because a line got muddled or a rhyme was just a clunker. Poets are emotional sorts who are extremely invested in their writing, but they are also craftsmen, and should be able to take a little criticism. But we are human to the core. Peggy Tabor Millin once said, "We never touch people so lightly that we do not leave a trace." When you touch a poet with your review, please keep in mind that you are not just reviewing four quatrains or rhyming couplets; you are reviewing the person who composed them. Honest criticism makes us better writers, but honesty tempered with a human touch is never too much to ask.
|
You've read it - now go back to FanStory.com to comment on each chapter and show your thanks to the author! |
| © Copyright 2015 redrider6612 All rights reserved. redrider6612 has granted FanStory.com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work. |
© 2015 FanStory.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Statement