Young Writers Society

In your opinion, what is the difference between what you would call a review and what you would call a critique. I can't seem to figure it out. Is there even a difference?

I use them interchangably. I don't know if that's how it's supposed to be used, though. I think technically the difference is that a review is just giving your opinion, but a critique is analyzing the parts of it, and giving helpful criticism. I'm not sure, though.

I tend to watch how I use them.

Critiques: Those are the reviews that take an hour to put together. The ones that point out things in the text, give examples, all that good stuff.

Reviews: Usually much shorter. Only giving general comments or your opinion on a work. No real examples from the text, just some general stuff.

That's the difference I see.

Thanks Rosey. I think you might be right. Which makes me a critic, not a reviewer. Weee. I'm special. hahaha. Well, if any one else would give an opinion, that would be awesome too.

I only use the word 'critique' (or just 'crit' if I'm feeling lazy).

I don't think there's a significant difference, really. Or at least, I hope not. Because I've called myself both, asked for both, and used them both interchangeably. As long as you're helping the writer, does it really matter what it's called?

Although, I always did think that 'critique' sounded ever so sophisticated.

~Evi

There's nothing lesser about a review, IMO. Film reviews and book reviews, for example, are not brief.

I think that reviews are general, while a critique is specifically critical. So a critique is also a review.

I use review and critique interchangeably, but I'm guessing that critiques are usually more in depth than reviews.

Reviews are more selfish in nature. Which means that a lot of thought is given about how it is written and structured and generally it is more about your opinion and what you thought about the work. A critique is much more selfless and it's a painstaking analysis of the whole work, picking out grammar errors and parts that don't work well, etc. It's also more objective than a review.

Like, in a review, I can say I didn't like the piece because I don't see why anybody would find the lives of spoiled, rich brats interesting. While in a critique, I'd focus more on why such and such character wasn't believable, etc.

I think they can both be equally helpful. A critique, for example, will help a writer find sentences that don't work and he'll have a better idea on how to make them better. A review, on the other hand, will make him see how people are reacting to his work.

Personally, I write reviews because I'm too selfish to actually make something just about another person other than myself.

Not sure what the difference is... . I think a critique might be small things, little mistakes, while a review is over-all, or in the bigger picture, so to speak. If this is the case, I critique a lot more than I review!
[spoiler]I don't really know though. I try to do them both a lot. [/spoiler]