Critiquing
Unknown | 8:55 AM |
inkpop
From an Inkpop thread,
“You mean writing style as in voice? Oh gosh no, I agree that it should not be tampered with.
For example, if a person likes angsty voices, it's not helpful for that person to pull someone else down for writing in a light, breezy sort of voice. Your voice is your signature, and although it can be developed, it wouldn't work to try to write in a style that is not your own.
”
Writing style is a catch-all term for the way one writes.
This includes everything from the 'voice' of the writer to what narrative modes they use to what recurring themes appear in their work.
Style can also include trademark choices the writer has made; for example, because I write humor I intentionally make my writing have a 'cartoon-y' feel. Part of this feel is the use of exclamation points and adverbs. Another part is the use of tildes to represent 'sing-song' voices (common in netspeak, but unheard of in professional writing).
I don't comment on style unless I think some of the choices are detracting from the intent of the writer (for example, you probably wouldn't want to use a lot of adverbs in a gritty crime novel because it would detract from the gloom you want to aim for).
When I critique, I focus on five main things:
1) Proper use of tense (I don't care if you write past or present tense, just be consistent).
2) Narrative mode (If you're writing third person limited, unless the protagonist has psychic powers they shouldn't know what others are feeling-- they can only assume what others are feeling based on cues they are given by that individual).
3) Spelling and grammar errors.
4) Incorrect use of words. (i.e. saying a person is irritably calm)
5) Being redundant. (i.e. saying Bob is Mary's friend after they went shopping together at the mall. We know they are friends; that was implied through their interactions).
6) Large amounts of telling when showing would be more effective (I'm not saying exposition is bad. I'm saying you have to know how and when to use it). In most cases it is better to gradually expose information by having the reader observe the interactions of characters with other characters / the environment.
This includes everything from the 'voice' of the writer to what narrative modes they use to what recurring themes appear in their work.
Style can also include trademark choices the writer has made; for example, because I write humor I intentionally make my writing have a 'cartoon-y' feel. Part of this feel is the use of exclamation points and adverbs. Another part is the use of tildes to represent 'sing-song' voices (common in netspeak, but unheard of in professional writing).
I don't comment on style unless I think some of the choices are detracting from the intent of the writer (for example, you probably wouldn't want to use a lot of adverbs in a gritty crime novel because it would detract from the gloom you want to aim for).
When I critique, I focus on five main things:
1) Proper use of tense (I don't care if you write past or present tense, just be consistent).
2) Narrative mode (If you're writing third person limited, unless the protagonist has psychic powers they shouldn't know what others are feeling-- they can only assume what others are feeling based on cues they are given by that individual).
3) Spelling and grammar errors.
4) Incorrect use of words. (i.e. saying a person is irritably calm)
5) Being redundant. (i.e. saying Bob is Mary's friend after they went shopping together at the mall. We know they are friends; that was implied through their interactions).
6) Large amounts of telling when showing would be more effective (I'm not saying exposition is bad. I'm saying you have to know how and when to use it). In most cases it is better to gradually expose information by having the reader observe the interactions of characters with other characters / the environment.
0 comments:
Post a Comment