z

Young Writers Society


To Be or Not To Be...Constructive?



User avatar
915 Reviews



Gender: Male
Points: 890
Reviews: 915
Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:11 am
Incandescence says...



Snoink--


The words "positive" and "negative" are completely arbitrary, defined by the recipient of the critique. So therefore, writing about "positive" reviews vs. "negative" reviews is pointless, which is why Imp didn't use this language.


Yes, I agree and said as much in my response: "Where we differ is in what you consider 'positive.' I don't think 'positive' or 'negative' ought to have any bearing on a critique." I think we had a communication error here: I did not mean "positive" in the sense of full of praise, and negative in the opposite sense. I meant "positive" and "negative" as relative scales for the value of a critique. What Imp did say is that balance is good, which does imply a scale of positive and negative responses. Still, I disagree with both.

Instead, the critiquer is responsible to make the critique useful to the writer. This was the point of the article.


What I don't agree with is the seemingly arbitrary method for determining the worth of a critique: whether or not you further the reconstruction process, or point out what was done well should not be a basis for determining whether you, as a reviewer, adequately did your job. The value of a critique is determined solely by the author--all we can do, as readers, is offer our own experience and lend our voice to the piece at hand. Since everybody has their own, unique voice, it is impossible for any review which sticks to the piece in question to be any more or less useful than another one.


Best,
Brad
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." -Hal Abelson
  





User avatar
376 Reviews



Gender: Male
Points: 16552
Reviews: 376
Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:18 am
Trident says...



Ay, I fear this recent argument has come up over one of the critiques I gave. It was a bit harsh, yes. It was honest, yes. I thought it was helping, but I can see that it was interpreted wrongly.

As Imp has said, there needs to be a strong sense of communication, otherwise the criticism is useless and a waste of time. It may even hurt the writer worse than help them, since they may either do the opposite or take your advice as doing one thing, when you meant to do another.

Opinion should have a place in a critique as well though. If someone tells me they didn't like my piece, well, that's okay. Not everybody will. But it won't stop me from writing, and more importantly, improving. That is indeed what we are here for.

The majority of advice I give is constructive. It can be construed as negative as I am pointing out flaws. I don't always give answers because that is part of the author's learning experience. Also, I often get annoyed when someone puts, "you could do it this way" and then writes the sentence out. To me, that is quite presumptuous. I might offer a suggestion, but not so much as to write for the writer. It is ultimately up to them to improve their writing.

Yes, I may often take for advantage that inexperienced writers don't know what I know. I try to add commentary that helps build, yet I don't always have the time or will to continuously teach younger writers. I critique and offer some advice. It is not my job to teach them every nuance of writing. It's cold, yes. But it's a cold market out there. You need to adapt to survive, and we can't hold your hands.
Perception is everything.
  








If you ever find yourself in the wrong story, leave.
— Mo Willems