>>> Item number 27080 from WRITERS LOG9403C --- (105 records) ---- <<< Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 01:30:03 JST Reply-To: WRITERS Sender: WRITERS From: Mike Barker Subject: TECH: Some Guidelines For Critiquing (Billy Joel's Storm Front wailing on the cd - Mitsuko bought me a new cd! tink's ready to rock and roll... we never knew what friends we had until we came to Leningrad...I don't mind the games I'm playing... crit!) My approach - I usually start by reading it straight through, as a reader. If there is a rough point or question, I note that, but this first pass, I'm reacting, pure and simple. Pause - what was the message? did I understand what was happening? Was it interesting - or did I have to force myself to read? Second pass - look at the technique. Is there a hook and question for the reader at the beginning? Is the real start of the story positioned well - or does the writer have to fill in too much background or spend too long wandering in background before finally getting to the story? Conflicts? Resolutions? Characters developed? and so forth... double-check the senses, setting, physical movement, and so on, since these are weaknesses of my writing. I usually read sections out loud at this point, especially to check wording and rhythm. This is where some reading in "how to write", critical theory, and so forth can help - but it isn't really necessary. What is necessary is trying to think through why this wording, why this scene, why this part of the story affects you or doesn't quite hit. Third pass - wherever I've got a question, comment, hitch, whatever, explain it. usually I put in some scribbled hints at how I would try to fix it - not necessarily finished rewriting, but some suggestions about how to fix what I saw there. also note the good stuff - where dialogue really is used well, a nicely turned phrase, or anything that sparkles. This step probably is the most important for exercising my abilities - honing up the problem makes sure I know how to fix it when I stumble over it in my own writing. Fourth step - not really a pass - consider the work as a whole, and tag on any overall comments or suggestions. Fifth step (for my own work, not for the list) - select from the suggestions and hints and rewrite the whole thing from beginning to end. Read it out loud. Double-check, revise, and polish that sucker until it shines... then set it aside and wait a while, and try to read it as a stranger would. I've got several checklists and other "helps" for critiquing. Doubt if I'll get them all typed in real soon, but I'm sure other people have some they use, too. Poetry - I use the same approach, except I depend far more on reading aloud, thumping out the rhythms (yes, I sit there and tap my fingers), letting my mind finger the word play and conceptual intricacies, trying to "grok" the whole (if you like that old-fashioned slang). I consider poetry as one variation of writing, not a completely separate field, and I expect to see the same kinds of things I see in any piece of writing in it. Compressed, distilled, perhaps even crystallized into forms that seem too rich for words, but not inherently different. I mostly look at trying to get my mind around what I think the writer was trying to do, then looking at how well it worked, and suggesting where I can some alternatives to do that. Since I've been on both ends of the communication exchange (writer and reader), it isn't that hard to decide whether I "got the message", then look for what in the message did or didn't work, and let the writer know what I thought happened on my end of things. As a writer myself, I can often suggest some alternatives. Obviously, it's the author's job to pick and choose, to rework or not, to make the message a medium carrying their sparks and fire out to set the world alight... but sometimes I can point out a path or two for them to try. I usually try to make sure the writer knows I'm talking about the work, not about them. Hell, they've already taken the big steps - they wrote it, they put it out in public - I'm just helping them polish the rough edges so that it really is sharper than the sword. I'm not interested in making them cut their own throat with it, just a vein. (that's one slant on crit's. I wonder how far I contradicted my own faq on the darn things.) [If anyone wants to read the faq on crits, please see http://web.mit.edu/mbarker/www/faqs/critfaq.html If someone wants to rewrite, expand, or otherwise make the faq fit our current understanding of this important workshop activity, I'm sure the author would be happy for the help. If someone wants to write another one - go for it!] and now, I return you to the regularly scheduled irregularities... hope some of you will feel free to join me in the sandbox. got to get those castles up! tink