llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
Oct 17, 2K6
In REVIEW OR CRITIQUE, WHICH IS IT? "professional" author, Budroe captures a reviewer's philosophy by the tail and gives it a shake.
What is not said is that a Review is undefine-able person by person. But believe it, much of value is stated.
Often in a comedic manner, for the read is far from dull, while underlines and bold emphasis an importance the author wishes to place on the value of the article, one can not help but snicker at "Yak school." One of the highlights of the piece which brings one (as reviewer or reader) to a handsome standpoint.
From this work, Budroe, I now safely gain advice which beleagured me all along. Namely, by your small sampling and explanation of how you rev, that we almost all rev in our own ways. You in yours, evident from this item.
The rest of us, myself inclued, rev as we rev. Period. While contemplating the difference of a rev and a critique yet once more the real, that's R-E-A-L meanings of both are sadly missed in the rush to include oneself. Sad but true. Almost as if spin is not only now associated with "govmint" speak, a pronounciation from S of the Mason Dixon line. Me(?) I like dicitonary meanings, which are facts. .... But now associated with calling a Yak person a catchall for all seems to sway way backwards from what is a review?
However, reading a little more carefully, backtracking the item at hand, one can gain from this take on reviewing in any case.
Now to go public or private here, Holmes is indeed the question. So tossing the proverbial coin as I mean you no harm while rating above. In fact toying with the idea of writing another rev piece myself lately. For what I really think and have observed on writing.com methods of revving besides:
Sometimes threatening new Teffom thoughts on revs, brand new thoughts on revving --- Since ideas plague me sometimes. However, these slip away fast, like fluff from dandelions in a hurricane tempest. And here I thought to find answers to questions, I had on topic. Sadly this was not the case. So public it is, Holmes. BUT the subject naturally needs more play to it from all sides and all viewpoints. We in truth need something else to work with around here. And in that sense your piece does excell for a method of revving is now once more outlined for all of the internet world to behold.
So guests, revvers, audience, authors, moderators, those in high office, and interested parties, poets, critics, try this one on for size.
And if the shoe fits as snuggly as Budroe's loafers, well then so be it.
Cordially,
** Images For Use By Upgraded+ Only ** |
|