A Child's Garden of Reviewing

REVIEWS, CRITIQUES, AND THE PRICE OF WHEAT IN CHINA
by Ben W. Gardner

What are we doing here?

         I am going to presume that the majority answer to that is "...because we have to write!" If you're as I am, we're addicted to laying our souls bare on paper the same as any street junky is to his heroin. If this weren't true, we'd be out by the pool or at a tailgate party with friends. The fact is writing is as important to each of us as breathing.

         Coinciding with this is that our writing isn't just for ourselves, otherwise, we'd get a blog somewhere and just put down words that have meaning only to us and the heck with the rest of the world.

         We are here, not just because we must write, but we must also communicate. Writing becomes almost meaningless if it doesn't convey your ideas, feelings, and emotions to another human. In conversation, we get visual and aural feedback. In writing, we get reviews (critiques). There is no way we can tell if we are "communicating" without this feedback. A good review tells us whether we are making our point, or missing the mark. Reviews are the only way we can ever hope to improve. As writers, the reading and reviewing of other's work also allows us to not just spot things in someone else's manuscript that we're guilty of ourselves, but also the process of writing the review challenges each of us to communicate (a review is writing, folks).

         This is an addition that I forgot to put in yesterday, but was brought to my attention by a reviewer! This person, being new here, felt intimidated by the "professionals" on the board...horse puckey!!

         Those who are not yet as jaded as the "professionals" and haven't had the formulaic "success in writing" courses beaten into their heads, actually have more to offer in a review that a lot of the rest of us do. They have the unique (to the board) perspective of being readers -- they are the public we're trying to reach. I may sell two books to other writers, but I want to sell a hundred to readers.

         The unseasoned author has a unique perspective born of naievette to bring to my writing. They know what they like and what they don't like. They haven't been poured into the mold of formula writing that the rest of us have because of years of editors, seminars, and writing classes. They don't know "how it's supposed to be", they just know what works for them.

         Give me ten amateur reviewers, and I'll give you one heck of a saleable story!

         As a prime example, several months ago I had a short story posted here and received a half-dozen reviews. Two "old-timers" found a couple of typos and a grammatical error. The "newbies" had some great suggestions for scenes and flow and what didn't work for them. I incorporated their suggestions (and fixed the typos) and the story sold to the first publisher I submitted!

         NEWBIES, REVIEW MY STUFF, PLEASE!

Practice makes pathetic

         I was surfing today on some other writing sites, and found a couple of words of wisdom that are definitely worth sharing. While I say that a good reviewer is diplomatic, it's also your duty to be honest. Practice does not make perfect. Praise confirms habits, and if these habits are bad, practice makes pathetic.

         If there is a stylistic, grammar, or logic error in a piece you're reviewing and you don't point it out with suggestions for improvement, the author will only be reinforced into that bad pattern.

         On the other hand, the good reviewer will be constructive and give suggestions where improvement is needed and how it can be done. Yoiur job is to be a growth hormone, not a suicide pill.

Points for a good review

         As much as I enjoy the perk and pat on the back from "I thoroughly enjoyed that...", it doesn't tell me what about it you enjoyed. What did I do that worked for you? This may have been a fluke on my part that will never happen again unless you tell me. The same goes for "This piece sucked, big-time...". Why? How come? What should I do different? What do you think I should do to make it better?

         I belong to about a dozen professional and amateur critique groups (what we do here (or should be doing) is critiquing, not reviewing. A review is what you read on the back cover of a paperback or on Amazon.com). What the writer needs (as much as writing) is a thoughtful, concise, and apropos analysis of the work so future rewrites or new pieces don't make the same mistakes (or that they do include things that work).

         The word "critique" implies criticism, but it doesn't have to. Kudos are just as important as finding fault...sometimes more so.

         I developed a brief template several years ago to remind me what to look for in both short stories and novels (sorry, I don't do poems). Briefly, a "review" (or whatever) should cover comments on:

Summary Comments:
Plot:
Characterization:
Dialogue:
Mechanics:
Logic:
Nitpicks:

         I'll go over these in a moment.

Work well and play nicely together

         A good (and useful) review depends less on what you say, than how you say it! You may be dead right, but if the author feels like you're attacking, they're going to ignore what you said or worse, are hurt by it. We all put a lot of ourselves into what we post (they're our children), if we feel you're attacking, we'll be defensive and that doesn't benefit either of us. I have a tendency to put a really harsh critique away for a month or two until I cool down. During that time, I may have re-written my piece a couple of times before I take another look at the critique. Damn, they had a point! Oh crap, that went out to the agent yesterday...

         While we all know that as writers and reviews, everything we say is our opinion. I haven't seen Stephen King or J. K. Rowling on writing.com recently, so we're all in the same boat. Even though we know this, it's nice for a reviewer to stipulate it, too. "In my opinion...", "You might think about...", "How would it be if you...", are all great phrases to stick into a review to remind the author that we're all bozos on this bus and you still get your point across as a reviewer. Again, it's not so much what you say, as how you say it that makes the difference.

         Phrases like "You need to," "have to," "should," "must," "can't," "don't," "!", ALL CAPS, the imperative mood-these are harsh and demanding. Readers (especially authors having their babies appraised) react to the tone, and ignore the message.

         Also, there are no authorities or rules of writing. I'll say that again, THERE ARE NO RULES OF WRITING. If you read the Chicago Manual of Style, the AP Stylebook, Strunk's Elements of Style, or Lynch's Guide to Grammar and Style (I like that the best), you'll soon find they all disagree about most things. There are no rules, just guidelines, so don't try to be authoritative as a reviewer because the professionals know it. Besides, most publishers have their own house rules about grammar and style that conflict with all the rest.

What's important?

         To get a full-length novel or a ten-thousand-word short story truly readable takes multiple rewrites and multiple critiques.

         Accept that you're going to see goofs, often ones you could drive a semi through, of which the author may be completely unaware.

         This is normal. Nobody writes a flawless first or second draft (maybe God or Julie Czerneda, but doggone few others). The more experienced you are as a writer, the more you know this is true.

         Try to respond with good humor. You aren't reading for pleasure, though you may find it. You're not an editor deciding whether to publish the novel or a New York Times reviewer passing judgment.

         You're plowing through what the author feels is less than final material to ASSIST the author in getting it closer to completion. You're giving HELP. NEVER comment on the author, his/her supposed character, morals, values, judgment, intelligence, etc., just the work itself. A manuscript may or may not fairly represent what its author believes, would do, or even really meant to say.

         Here's an easy way to make sure you're doing your best in a crit. Pretend it's yours and you've got to a) identify and understand each problem so you can fix it and b) identify the successes so you know what text not to change, what to do more of, and why. For each scene, write those two things in your crit.

         Make concrete suggestions for improvement wherever you can.

         Comments on spelling, grammar, and punctuation are optional.

         You'll notice that in the sentence above, I put a comma before the "and" in a list. Strunk's says that's a no-no, CMS says it's OK, and Lynch says that nobody cares so do what you want. See? No rules - just write.

         A crit (review) is meant to give a reality check, to give information, perspective, to light the path, point the way, to give courage and hope so the author has the knowledge and energy to return to the manuscript once again and, this time, hit it out of the park and up to a star. That's what we're here for!

         Nothing less.

A review, by any other name, would still smell...

         Okay, what do you look for? I said that there are no rules...well, there are a few, but they're more rules of the game. If we want to play (and eventually earn enough to purchase a six-pack with), we need to play by these rules.

         Down deep, I don't totally agree with these, but editors, agent, and publishers do, and they're keeping my lights on. The first is the (ugh) three act structure: setup, confrontation, climax. This is what readers expect these days and they're buying the books, so just do it and grit your teeth. Make sure that the author you're reviewing does it, also.

         Here are some of the things that should appear within these major categories:

         BEGINNING - Sets up ordinary world of the protagonist.
         INCITING INCIDENT - 1st major event. Upsets the status quo.
         Story up to midpoint - Protagonist is learning how big the problem is.
         MID-POINT CRISIS OR REVERSAL - Ups the stakes. Link between problem & solution.
         Story to 3rd turning point - Progressive complications.
         3RD TURNING POINT - Protagonist realizes full scope of problem.
         CRISIS - Point when things can't continue as they are.
         Story to climax - Exhilarating acceleration of action and reaction.
         CLIMAX - The action the protagonist takes.
         Resolution - Ties up loose ends and foreshadows the future.

         As a reviewer you need to determine whether or not the story you're reading follows this pattern. Otherwise, it may be a nice story to tell your kids at bedtime, but it'll never sell. Tell your author what's missing and give a hand at helping them fill in the blanks.

         This becomes not just an aid to the author, but will help you in your future writing, also.

         I wrote a screenplay last year that I submitted to one professional group and I still remember the best crit that I got back: "Where's the bad guy?" He was right; I had a series of problems that were overcome, but no major crisis event. Back to the word processor...

And finally, your honor...

         I hope that you now see where reviewing helps everybody. I love doing it, not just because I don't have to be rewriting my own stuff (which I should be doing right now), but that the reviewer benefits as much as the author from a well-thought out analysis of their work.

WRITE ON!