So you've found a stinker. The grammar is non-existant, misspelled words are everywhere, the plot is nebulous, and the author of this train wreck thinks they're hot stuff.
How do you critique this?
Every author has a different way to deal with this. Here is mine.
Step 1: Rant.
We can't expect you to take this crime against the English Language lying down. So, in this step, write the meanest, dirtiest, and most vulgar critique you can.
Step 2: Recover.
Obviously, we can't post Step 1. It would surely lead to a ban. So, let's take a step back. Some questions to guide you through this process.
Is the author in question new to writing? If they are, then they may not know some of the tricks we take for granted.
How would the author react to criticism? If they say "this work is my life" or something to that effect at the beginning of their piece, they may not be open to criticism.
Cause the last thing you want to say to this writer is: "If this work is your life, then you must have a pretty screwed up life."
I saw one reviewer rip apart a piece of work written by an 11 year old. Even though the work was flawed, the reviewer crossed the line, since the reviewer did not take into account the author's writing experience. It's this sort of criticism that is destructive and leads to people leaving YWS.
Step 3: Diplomacy.
President Bush can't just walk up to a nation and say "You're all full of it." He has to say it in a diplomatic way.
So it is with reviewers.
Instead of using broad generalizations like "this work is terrible", go into detail on each part of the story. I will go through a literary work sentence by sentence, until I just see the same errors over and over again.
As you go through, you can methodically go through each of the sentences and point out grammar errors, spelling errors, and anything else. Pointing them out as single errors provides examples of their bad behavior, while giving them advice on how to remedy that behavior.
Step 4: Summarize.
This is where the diplomacy comes in. You have to be honest, but it doesn't follow that it is best to be brutally honest.
What you should do is outline common errors in this section and how you can solve them. "I found grammatical and spelling errors in your story, which can be corrected using spelling and grammar checks on your word processor."
If there is a general theme to the plot that is wrong, you can also express it here: "I didn't connect with the characters and the story has many cliches in it."
Occassionally, you will find something that is so terrible that it needs to be scrapped. Don't say "scrap this and start fresh." Instead, list the errors like before. The author will look at the huge list of errors and make the decision to scrap it based on those errors. Telling an author to scrap their work is like saying "you're so stupid, that I need to tell you to scrap this."
Reviewers have no business telling the authors what they should do with their novel. The only business they have is telling authors how they can improve. A good reviewer makes suggestions, not demands.
A note on constructive criticism. For every negative thing you find, you must have a way out of it. If you find a problem, you should give a solution to go with it. If you don't have a solution, say that you don't know how to fix it.
If you just list everything wrong with a literary work without solutions, then you're engaging in destructive criticism. With destructive criticism, the reviewer is just trying to trash a literary work, with no attempt to help a writer improve. People that engage in destructive criticism are violating forum rules and can be banned.
Gender:
Points: 2090
Reviews: 863