| |
Critiquing is kind of tricky. It takes a certain amount of maturity on both
sides of the table. To paraphrase one of my mentors (warning, he wasn't the
kindest of souls. I remember the triage of broken souls after his class.);
'Don't tell me what you liked or didn't like, I don't care. Your
opinion is just that, an opinion. I want to know what worked, what didn't
work? Why or why not? Just because you don't like a particular style
doesn't meant that it doesn't create the effect that the author is after.
Look at the the author is trying to create and decide if they have done so
in an effective manner. Is there some way that it can be done more
effectively? That's what I want from you.'
I'm lifting this straight from a creative writing workshop website. There
could be any number of places that have rules for critiquing but I think
you'll find that they are all very similar.
<snip from http://www.oneofus.co.uk/stories/critique.htm>
Name of respondent:
Name of item being reviewed:
1. Describe your general reaction to the item e.g. favourable/unfavourable,
be as expansive as you like.
2. Comment on the style of the piece. Was it consistent all the way through?
Was the language used by the author appropriate to the piece, if not, please
identify parts that seemed out of place.
3. What was your reaction to the characters (if the item had any). Were they
convincing given the context of the story?
4. Did you find the dialogue (if any) natural (for the characters speaking
it). How might it have been improved?
5. Describe any inconsistencies you felt existed in the plot line e.g.
continuity errors, glaringly obvious solutions to problems that the
characters could have used but didn’t etc.
6. Anything else?
<end snip>
I'd suggest something very similar to these rules for us. Realize that none
of this is personal. In most cases we are trying to support one another to
help us become better builders. The best way is to look at a creation and
veiw it by some simple standards, (I know I x-posted this to .general but
mecha is the running example so please bear with me)
What did the builder want to achieve? (i.e. usually a kick ass mecha)
Did the builder succeed? How or how didn't they? (i.e. arms too small)
What do you think worked well? (the guns are big and shooty and make
the mech look beefy!)
What would you have improved on? (insert any building wisdom here...)
Anything else? (This should be enough to get us going )
> I was just jokin.....just a little joke.....
Oh, good, I was hoping you were. The sad thing is that there are folks out
there that arrogant.
>
> you had to compare me to dave.....the best...
Dude, always compare yourself to the best. And do better. If you can't
figure out how to do something, ask. Don't worry about copying, and if you
do feel a little weird about it, give credit or ask permission. I found
that even when trying to copy, it ends up looking completely different anyway.
> Wait to you see my new version the LMHOF will be begging to let me in and
> I'm gonna be all "Nope" and their gonna be all "Well nevermind then" and
> then I'm gonna be "No please I beg you!!!" Yeah you'll see.....all of you
> will see HA!!!!
No sir, PLEASE, be in the hall of fame! PLEASE!!! ;) Bring it on. I can't
wait to see it.
>
> i feel like crying......-Semaj *sniff*
That's good! It builds ~character~
:p
Mark
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: We need a new curator
|
| (...) Ouch.... I was just jokin.....just a little joke..... you had to compare me to dave.....the best... his optimus isn't that great anyway....... sure it looks EXACTLY like the toy...... it doesn't even transform....... that was just my (...) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.build.mecha)
|
55 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
