If you don't know what you're talking about should you review/comment on other people's work?

10 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Tue, 2002-09-03 15:18

This is sort of a follow on from the last thread. I believe that yes they should.

I am ESN (educationally sub-normal) or at least I assume that I am it's a label I was given from a very young age and nobody has told me that it had a life span that has now expired. I can't write manually (Well I can but you wouldn't want to read it) I have to get my son to write things like Christmas cards and such. My son is ten and I can't help him with his maths or science homework because it is beyond me other than basic addition or subtraction I'm clueless. I literally have not got a clue about the mechanics of writing and vitrually EVERYTHING I've learned, I've leared in the last two years on various writing sites and through reviewing other peoples work.

So does that mean that I should never pass opinion on other people's stuff?

I have as much idea about how a piece should be properly written and punctuated as I have about what the texture of Jupiter feels like .. but I can do a damned insightive line by line word by word review, because I have my strengths, I know people for instance and have a 'feel for what people would or wouldn't do in a given situation. I'm okay with the psychology of a character,. And basically on a much more basic and simple level I know what feels right or wrong to me.

So I know what I like.

On sites with comment boxes I leave something on every single piece that I read. Because I know for myself I love to get comments, even if it's only 'Terribly over-written tripe' which was one that springs to mind. It's frustrating to know that say eight people have read your story, but to not have a clue whether they liked it or not. So I feel that's it's more than just nice to leave a comment I think it's curtesy.

On the last thread someone gave a really good example of people liking dogs rating dog stories highly. I honestly can't see anything wrong with that. I love psycho/horror and am far more likely to give something along those lines a good review than a piece of romantic poetry or sci-fi. Surely what we like in literature comes down to personal taste. I've often said to someone 'Sorry mate this one didn't work for me, but even I can see that it was a fantastic piece of writing'

I think as long as you try to be honest without being hurtful. it's always good to leave a comment.

Tue, 2002-09-03 18:10

freda

I'm not sure about the last thread (what it was I mean) All I know is however much a writer knows about a subject, he can still write badly about it. Think about all those crap text books at school which are responsible for people failing their exams. There is some writing , lets say crime fiction, which might only appeal to crime fans. Other crime writing, say by Patricia Highsmith will appeal to someone completely disinterested in crime . I am an example of this latter kind of reader. i still know no more about crime fiction than before I read Patricia Highsmith but i feel qualified to say she is a good writer. However on abc and other writing sites, I sometimes feel unqualified to comment because I know for sure that I think in an idiosyncratic way and quite often miss points people are trying to make. So I don't comment unless I like the thing! I wouldnt even make a negative comment if I thought something had no hope.

Tue, 2002-09-03 21:52

Ice

I like to think a poem is like art. You see a painting and go wow, or you walk away shaking your head. I dont think it matters how the canvas was prepared, or the frame made. Same applies to music. Some music lifts me till i want to get down and boogie like a wild man and other stuff leaves me cold. You are right Sooz, comments make the difference and can lead to more thoughtful work as a result :)

Tue, 2002-09-03 23:24

Karl Wiggins

If you ask me what kind of music I like, I'll probably answer smooth jazz initially, although the truthful matter would really be anything that makes my toe tap. It's the same with writing. I like what I like, and more than likely for a variety of reasons that even I don't understand. Other pieces - poetry especially - can leave me cold. I read them skipping over words and not seeming to get anywhere. And yet, I'm experimenting with poetry myself at the moment and having a lot of fun. The point is that just because I don't get it, doesn't at all mean that it isn't superb writing. I'm sure a lot of it is. It just isn't what I like to read. So I'm the one who's missing out, right? I personally feel that too many writers go overboard with the adjectives, splashing as many as they can through a line as if it's a neccessary part of good writing. But then, what the hell do I know? However, all of us have the right to our opinions and all of us - from a child of six who's just learned to read to a professor of literature - can offer comments on writing because we know what we like to read ourselves. Sooz, you may be a bit of a thicko, but you're still one of the best writers on this site.

Wed, 2002-09-04 08:18

Sooz

Lol Is that what's called a backhanded compliment? .. thanks Karl Grinning like a simple loon here :-)

Wed, 2002-09-04 12:35

Henstoat

Extents, extents. Subjective responses are all well and good, and are mostly responsible for our reaction to writing. If you state your subjective response as an objective one, however, you impose slightly upon other people's - it is an assault on feelings with untruths. Take, for example, the thread I've just replied to in the General Discussion forum - you get the statement, "This shows that Tom Saunders is a far better writer than Al Stewart." Now, that's b.ollocks by itself. It's just a statement of feeling rendered as fact. If I were to say, "Al Stewart is a far better writer than Tom Saunders," or "Al Stewart and Tom Saunders are equal in the writing stakes," it would be just as valid a statement, despite the fact that the three cannot be simultaneously true. So we have to be careful how we word subjective responses. I think the fundamental point is what Karl said - that if he doesn't appreciate a piece, it's him who's missing out. I'd say this is true of all writing - if just one person finds it exhilarating and brilliant, then the rest of us are missing out. This does, however, have its advantages - if everything you read and encountered was pleasurable, you'd spend an awful lot of money.

Wed, 2002-09-04 16:12

appleblossom

I remember a website I stumbled onto a few years ago. You had to critique at least 3 pieces of work before you could submit any of your own. It was totally amazing, because the message board was jam-packed with comments, suggestions, opinions etc. It was awsome. I was really keen to submit work, so I took on the huge task of choosing something I thought I could comment on. I tried to be as objective as possible and I learnt a great deal about my own writing by dissecting the work of others. Feedback, whether it's good or bad, can be a great learning tool for a writer as long as that feedback is objective. You can't just say "that was a total piece of rubbish" or "that's the worst thing I've ever read in my life" or "don't give up your day job" etc. Even if you don't feel qualified, you still have an opinion and you should be able to say what you did or didn't like about the piece. Having said that, I don't feel guilty if I don't comment on every single thing I read. Lets be realistic here.....there's a huge volume of work to get through. If something grabs me then I'll comment on it. Even if it's terrible. In fact (strangely enough), I find it easier to comment on things that I can criticise....don't ask me why. In fact, while I'm on a rant here, let me just put in a bit of free advertising --- my latest submission called "Melvin-in-the-Fridge" is about this very topic, and describes my recent mishap in critiquing. Oh, and H....I already spend a lot of money!! Appleblossom

Thu, 2002-09-05 20:52

Digital

hey I don't even know what I'm talking about when I write most of the time. probably why my work isn't really any good and the poetry doesn't flow, but any construtive critisism good or bad should be welcomed by anyone serious about doing anything. and as far as not knowing what you're talking about? writing is made for most people to read and to try and get as many people as possible to undertstand your point or feeling (at least mine is) so anyone is welcome to comment!

Sun, 2002-09-08 17:58

gingermark

I haven't got a clue what I'm thinking about half the time, let alone to talk about it, even further so when writing about it. But i still like talking. And i love reading and writing. As far as i'm concerned, this is the internet where free speech is available to all. We shouldn't be constrained by whether we are articulate enough to talk about any given subject. Even if you knopw nothing about the subject you still have something valid to say, even if it's simply 'Oh, how does that work?'.

Thu, 2002-09-12 01:29

#10

seannelson

I guess I feel that everybody has a right to review a piece. Even a negative or a less than insightful review of a piece adds to the conversation about a piece. And it's really a variety of perspectives on a story that allow an author to improve or just better appreciate their own piece.

Topic locked