z

Young Writers Society


Megrim's Critique Crucible



User avatar
264 Reviews



Gender: None specified
Points: 23295
Reviews: 264
Mon Sep 04, 2017 5:05 pm
View Likes
Megrim says...



Megrim's Critique Crucible

Image

Think you have the reviewing skillz? Feeling pretty good about your approach to reviewing, and want the rug pulled out from under you? Feeling pretty bad about your approach to reviewing, and want an objective outsider to point out all the places you goofed? Well then... Welcome to the Critique Crucible, where your reviewing skills can enter a trial by fire!

There are many great articles in the Knowledge Base for how to approach reviewing, but let's face it--a lot of us learn by doing, and sometimes it takes having an outside party point out your missteps. That's where I come in.

Why should I care what Megrim thinks?
I critique a lot. I've been a member of critique-focused sites, chats, and forums for a looong time. I also have a weekly writing group where we critique each other live for two hours at a time. I fancy myself pretty experienced at this, with a decent feel for what works and what doesn't. Even more importantly, all this stuff varies for every individual, so it's vital to understand how to focus different critique styles for different people. I believe that all reviewers have something to offer, regardless of skill level or background, both of the reviewer and the reviewee.

Why should I care at all?
Believe it or not, you learn way more by critiquing others than by having your own work critiqued. Improving your critical eye will train your inner editor, and then when you turn back to your own writing, things start popping out left and right that you never would have noticed otherwise. Also, improving the general quality of your critiques helps the YWS community as a whole.

How does it work?
->Reviews are submitted voluntarily by the people who wrote them.
->You can NOT enter a review written by someone else.
->The story being reviewed will not be critiqued by me--I'm looking at the submitted review ONLY.

Reviews will be assessed on five axes for a total possible of 25 points:

    Organization: (1-5 points)
    Even the best advice can be hard to understand if it's presented in a helter-skelter manner. Whether you use subheadings or simply organize your paragraphs for a good flow, this axis looks at how logically and coherently your review is presented.

    Scope: (1-5 points)
    You can think of this as thoroughness, but I used the word scope because a good critique mentions both the small and the large, the near future and the far future, the sentence level and the scene level. Attention to detail is great, but we also want to consider long-term plot and character developments. This axis looks at how in-depth and comprehensive your review is.

    Sensitivity: (1-5 points)
    The author's age, experience level, and specific feedback requests all play a factor in how a piece should be approached. Treating the author respectfully and in a manner appropriate for their wishes and writing level is as important a consideration as the writing itself. This axis is all about the author-reviewer dynamic.

    Length: (1-5 points)
    This is not a linear relationship! You don't get more points for longer reviews, but rather, having a length appropriate to what is said. A short but poignant review is better than a long review full of filler. This axis examines whether the points were covered sufficiently, while also not full of padding.

    Explanation: (1-5 points)
    When you make points, it's generally helpful to explain your thinking a little bit. Whether you feel bored, confused, have personal insight on a matter, have grappled with the same thing in your own writing, have a better idea in mind, know of some resources on a topic, or have some examples--as long as you give the author a chance to understand where you're coming from, that allows them to better determine if they should follow your advice, and why. This axis considers whether you've offered good explanations for subjective comments.

How do I enter?
First of all, this isn't for the faint-hearted--it is a cruicible after all! Therefore, so I can trust you've read this and know what you're signing yourself up for, please type somewhere in your post anything to do with dying in fire. (Eg "I hope my review doesn't go up in flames" or anything creative).

Code: Select all
[b]CRUCIBLE REQUEST[/b]

[b]Your Name:[/b]
[b]Title of Work Reviewed:[/b]
[b]Type of Work Reviewed:[/b] (Chapter, short story, poem, etc)

[b]Link to Your Review:[/b]
[b]Date of Review:[/b]

[b]Any last words?:[/b]


My responses will be posted publicly in this thread, with lots of bold and headings so they'll be hard to miss. Conversation is allowed and encouraged in the thread - there's a big bold header in that template so I can identify requests. Any requests ignoring the template will be ignored in turn.

Good luck!
  





User avatar
109 Reviews



Gender: Female
Points: 7831
Reviews: 109
Tue Sep 05, 2017 5:53 pm
ajruby12 says...



Well, this looks interesting! I'd love to try it out. (I by no means consider myself to be a great reviewer, but I really want to be able to help people and provide useful critique)

CRUCIBLE REQUEST

Your Name: AJ (or Ariana)
Title of Work Reviewed: One Planet Earth, Extra Crispy, Please!
Type of Work Reviewed: Essay

Link to Your Review: work/FalconryGirl9086/One-Planet-Earth-Extra-Crispy-Please-137112#c627593
Date of Review: August 24, 2017

Any last words?: Tell my family and friends that I love them. Maybe one day my crushed soul will rejuvenate sufficiently to again enter a state of mild happiness and joy. The inferno may surround me, but I refuse to die in such unimaginable heat. I may still prevail.
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them." - Ray Bradbury
  





User avatar
264 Reviews



Gender: None specified
Points: 23295
Reviews: 264
Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:52 am
View Likes
Megrim says...



AJ ENTERS THE CRUCIBLE! (@ajruby12)

Image


Organization: 5/5
The bullet points make this review very easy on the eyes, and also easy to return to check something quickly. They're split up into positives and negatives, which is always good to include, with a closing paragraph at the end. Good layout if you ask me!

Scope: 2/5
I think you did a pretty good job of covering various areas of the piece, but at the same time you could have gone more in-depth. Some line edits were pointed out, which are always good to include, but they make up a solid 4 of the 5 constructive feedback points (or maybe 3 if I'm generous, but still over half). I'd like to see some broader comments, with some thoughts on the conceptual/meta level. Or potentially on a paragraph-level, like your last point--more like that.

Sensitivity: 5/5
Pleasant, enthusiastic, and amiable. I think you presented yourself as quite approachable as well as humble.

Length: 3/5
This one goes hand-in-hand with scope in that I think you could have gone a touch longer with some additional broader thoughts/feelings/suggestions. I think the line/grammar suggestions are appropriately... length'd... but there could me more coverage of big-picture stuff.

Explanations: 4/5
Everything that was subjective was well-explained, such as the suggestion to tighten the closing paragraph. I guess I felt hesitant giving a full 5/5 because there weren't a ton of them. Nicely done, but you could add more.

OVERALL: 20/25
B-Grade Critique


Let's have some applause for our first victim!

Image
  





User avatar
109 Reviews



Gender: Female
Points: 7831
Reviews: 109
Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:04 am
View Likes
ajruby12 says...



@Megrim, thank you! That's really, really helpful. Hopefully my reviewing abilities will improve in the future. :)
Knowing some of my strengths and weaknesses is awesome. There's always room for improvement!

Overall critique of a critique grade: 10/10, A+

(Hey, I didn't die! Yet...)
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them." - Ray Bradbury
  





User avatar
472 Reviews



Gender: Male
Points: 25
Reviews: 472
Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:38 pm
Lightsong says...



This is interesting, I'll give it a try! :P

CRUCIBLE REQUEST

Your Name: Lightsong
Title of Work Reviewed: The Seventh Sister (Part 1)
Type of Work Reviewed: Short story

Link to Your Review: work/DarkPandemonium/The-Seventh-Sister-Part-1-137082#c627503
Date of Review: 23rd August 2017

Any last words?: Rip it apart since... I've no soul! :twisted:
"Writing, though, belongs first to the writer, and then to the reader, to the world.

The subject is a catalyst, a character, but our responsibility is, has to be, to the work."

- David L. Ulin
  





User avatar
264 Reviews



Gender: None specified
Points: 23295
Reviews: 264
Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:28 pm
View Likes
Megrim says...



LIGHTSONG ENTERS THE CRUCIBLE! (@Lightsong)

Image


Organization: 3/5
The paragraphs have a logical flow, if you think about it, but it wasn't immediately obvious. I like that it starts out with the positives and then leads in naturally to the negatives. I wonder if it would benefit from more "signposting"--like a brief thesis sentence for each paragraph/point, and a summary conclusion. If I need to glance back to find what you said about something, I have to wade through the whole review to find it.

Scope: 4/5
I like that you address how you feel about everything where the chapter leads off--not only what just happened, but also your thoughts on what's about to happen. The review includes some smaller/line-level suggestions, but not a ton. I especially like that you examined the characters in addition to the plot.

Sensitivity: 5/5
Nothing bad to say here. I very much like that all the comments are phrased in a manner such as this is how *I* felt, this is what *my* reaction was. Makes it feel very much like genuine reader reaction, which always makes authors less defensive in my experience.

Length: 4/5
Pretty decent, especially since you touched on plot, setting, and character all together. There's room to go more in-depth, especially with the broader concepts, like where you think things are headed next. Also there was very little in the way of line comments, but I'm not too picky about those--I'd rather have more big-picture stuff than line suggestions.

Explanations: 4/5
Suggestions are well-backed with reasoning of where you were confused or how you interpreted something. Now that I'm looking closely, while there's a lot of analysis, there actually weren't too many suggestions really. It's not imperative to suggest how to fix lots of things, but I think the amount of actual criticism in the review is fairly low; if I were the author, I don't think there's a lot in take-away for areas that need improvement. So it may be worth balancing the praise and analysis with more comments on areas that left you confused, bored, or were hard to believe.

OVERALL: 20/25
B-Grade Critique


Thanks for volunteering!
  





User avatar
174 Reviews

Supporter


Gender: Female
Points: 3255
Reviews: 174
Sat Sep 16, 2017 2:39 am
soundofmind says...



i crave interaction hi

CRUCIBLE REQUEST

Your Name: soundofmind/sound
Title of Work Reviewed: untitled work i.
Type of Work Reviewed: poem

Link to Your Review: review
Date of Review: August 31, 2017

Any last words?: I expect to burn, in an inglorious fashion, and crumble into a pile of ash. Please, light the match.
Pants are an illusion. And so is death.

  





User avatar
264 Reviews



Gender: None specified
Points: 23295
Reviews: 264
Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:46 pm
View Likes
Megrim says...



SOUND ENTERS THE CRUCIBLE! (@soundofmind)

Image


Organization: 5/5
Looks good to me, particularly how each point is separated and discussed separately. Using the quotes helps break up the review visually, and I'd say overall it feels easy to reference back to if I want to check what you said about something.

Scope: 5/5
I know it's a short poem and doesn't give you a lot of room for scope, but I think you nailed it. I really like how you addressed it on three levels: overall emotional impact, then kind of a medium-level formatting/tone comment, and also a few wording suggestions. So we get coverage from the big to the little. I think the overall emotional impact is the most important one, but it's nice to include both the broad and the in-depth.

Sensitivity: 5/5
Tricky territory here because the content of the poem could be quite personal. I like how you addressed this and mentioned how you didn't want to pressure them, while gently prodding to include more from an objective standpoint. I'm personally not a fan of repeating how everything's in your own opinion and to take it with a grain of salt (own it! how you feel about something can't be wrong), I can't argue that in an environment like YWS, the extra nod can help prevent the author taking things too personally.

Length: 5/5
No complaints. I'm always baffled how people manage to say as much about poems as they do.

Explanations: 5/5
In this particular review the explanations overlap with what I said about sensitivity, because I think a lot of them were presented as "this is how I feel." I felt like all the points brought up were explained and addressed, and it was clear what was subjective.

OVERALL: 25/25
S-Grade Critique


Perfect score! Great critique!
  





User avatar
174 Reviews

Supporter


Gender: Female
Points: 3255
Reviews: 174
Wed Sep 20, 2017 1:42 am
soundofmind says...



@Megrim Thank you so much! omg I totally didn't expect to get a good score at all haha

AND YEAH I tend to lean towards being heavy on the "this is just my opinion" bit just cause I'm a passive booger who is afraid to step on any toes or hurt any feelings but,, yEAh

THANK YOU SO MUCH
Pants are an illusion. And so is death.

  








I love how we all band together to break things...
— Kelpies