A little concerned and annoyed...

[Chad Sanderson]

I love reviewing as much as the next guy. (If, well, he likes reviewing too.) But as a writer, reader, and reviewer, sometimes I find that a good bit of the reviews on this site are utterly unhelpful.

Now, believe me, I am not talking about myself here. (Auto-biographical posts aren't really my thing anyways) I've only published one short story so far, and I thought the feedback was on a scale of one to ten: gray.

Here is my reasoning: I love this site because of its policy of reviewing. I think it is an utterly fantastic idea. However, I think a lot of people are going about reviewing the wrong way. I don't think my way is right by any means, but I still know enough about editing to understand what is wrong. Now to my point--

THE WRONG

Far too many reviews I've seen are primarily concerned with grammar issues/sentence structure/word placement and (maybe) 10-20% content. Usually not even that. Is this a bad thing? Hell yes.

Improving grammatically on a piece of writing is a must. No one will be able to make it as a writer with bad grammar, so it's good to correct that. However, an editor does not only seek to correct one aspect of a piece of writing. They seek to correct it as a whole. They are actually more focused on making the writer improve.

Its sort of like that old saying--"If you feed a man a fish he'll be full for a day, teach him to fish and he'll be full for a lifetime." If all you do is correct random grammar mistakes, the author will only get better for that piece of writing. Sure, he may not make the same grammar mistake again, but you could be doing so much more.

When reviewing, it is essential to examine the writing itself. What is the piece saying, what is the author trying to say, could they be explaining it better? Those are all questions good editors ask. It is then up to you to first examine the piece yourself, for content. Does it speak to you, does it hit you on an emotional, mental, or spiritual level. If so, why? If not, why? What would you say in their shoes? Would it impact someone else moreso than you? You should also be aware that the writer's audience may find their work more appealing than you. Consider that. Consider their audience. Do you think they hit the target?

I'm being very long winded. That happens when I'm frustrated. All I'm trying to say is that a lot of reviewers don't spend the amount of time they should on a piece of literature. An editor should first check for purpose, then content, then grammar. The latter is far less important than the rest. Anybody could tell you that "mythological" only has one c. Anyone can say that the last comma is misplaced. But does that help the writer grow? Does it contribute to the feeling and purpose of the piece? No. It's just a waste of time.

A lot of people already do this. I was just feeling a little irritated at those that didn't. :)

[Cogito]

This has been brought up before.

My own feeling is that a review should focus on the two or tree squeakiest wheels. Otherwise, the writer will only pay attention to the couple of things he or she wants to address.

Many times, the SPaG is where te squealy wheels reside. There is little point diving into the finer points of writing if the mechanical aspects are shot to hell.

But I have my style, and you have yours. As long as the critiquer is putting the effort in to provide an adequate levcl of detail, one person's approach is not "more right" than another. You don't get to dictate others' reviewing strategies.

I will say the reviewer will get more out of the reviewing effort if e or she takes a step or two outside his or her comfort zone. If you're accustomed to fixing punctuation, take a stab at critiquing point of view consistency or how expressive the dialogue is.

And worry a bit less about wheter the other reviewer has the same strategy as you.

[Kas]

Chad, I get where you are coming from, but consider this.

Reviewing is a learning process for the reviewer as well. I think you will notice that many of the poor reviews on this site come from those with very few posts (new members). Keep in mind that those who are new to this may not be very comfortable offering advice, especially when they may be the ones most in need of it.

I had never written anything serious in my life until just a few weeks before coming here. All I really have to go on is a lot of reading experience. As I learn and grow more confident I offer more suggestions. My reviews will improve as I do. When I first came here I was extremely uncomfortable offering any feedback. Who am I to criticise? Some of my suggestions may have been completely wrong. But I'm starting to see that I have a lot to offer in some cases. Not nearly as much as some members, but more than I had thought at first.

The thing is that everyone has strong points and weak points. Maybe SPaG is really all that some people feel comfortable commenting on. Giving no advice is probably better than giving bad advice. You can't hold everyone up to this standard since not everyone is capable or confident enough to live up to it.

Of course, some will just be half assed, but you get that everywhere.

Aside from that - I invite you to demonstrate the perfect review by critiquing my own piece in the novel section:p.

[Evil Ferret of Randomness]

I have the perfect way to paraphrase what Kas said... "Noobs can't review, now rate my stuff."
XP


I, one hundred percent, agree, Chad. Though I have yet to delve into the reviewing aspect of this site, and therefore have no opinions on it, I do believe that Grammar is relatively unimportant when next to Content. In the end, if the idea isn't good in general(An Idea that has no real audience), then there would be no point in offering Grammatical advice.

More so, explaining the rules of Grammar when reviewing is important, as you had said. At least, thats how I interpreted it.

ANYWAYS! Good job, and good day to you all!

[Chad Sanderson]

Cogito: Well, I never said my review style was perfect. Actually, in the beginning I said that I didn't think my reviewing style is right at all (For everyone). It does depend on the person and how they adapt to the piece of writing. And you're right there really isn't any need to dive into reviewing something if the mechanics need a lot of work.

But...

Saying that "not reviewing content" is a style is kind of weak. It really doesn't make any sense. It just doesn't. It's like offering the entree` and not the full meal. I'm not trying to make people change, but it would be nice if some were more aware of how to review. Please don't say that "there's not "one way to review, everyone has different styles." Everyone has a different way of writing too, but every sentence needs nouns and verbs and periods. Style comes from people choosing how to use what they have. Would you consider a piece of writing "good" if it had no subject or structure? (No)

--

Also, I know that a lot of people are new to writing and reviewing. Which is why I put this. It would be nice if they used a little bit more sense when reviewing, and I would think learning a few things that actual editors do would help them (and the writer) out. If anything, it would be nice to let new people know a few other methods that you could use to examine a piece. :D

[Mcarpenter]

What you say has some merrit. We work together like a body though, if we work properly. Some are better at critiquing one area, so that's what they do mostly. Others are better at critiquing another area and should. I like to think of myself as the encourager/commenter of underlying plot, tone and thematic clues. :D With a mild interest in digging out your SPaG problems (and only if there aren't too many to drown in).

[Evil Ferret of Randomness]

Perhaps I'm just not familiar with the term, but I must ask... SPaG?

[Kas]

Perhaps I'm just not familiar with the term, but I must ask... SPaG?

Spelling, punctuation and grammar.

[Evil Ferret of Randomness]

Thanks. ^_^

[Leaka]

I know how you feel Chad.
That is actually my whole entire reviewing style.
Understand the idea.
Ask the writer their intent.
Tell them about how I feel as an audience.
Ask them certain things you know if their story doesn't click in my head.
I don't do Grammar and I don't do SPAG.
When I'm writing a novel, I just want to write it out because there is something as killing your story with editing.
Edit killer.
So all my review is based on the story itself, not the way it is formated.
And certainly these are rough drafts so we can't expect professional work, we shouldn't expect that from people.
We should be helping with the concept and the idea.
To me that is a review.
Not SPAG and Grammar.
Sadly, there a few people here who think my style of reviewing isn't helpful, isn't strong enough, and isn't the way to review.
And I don't agree with that.
We should accept all styles of reviewing just the same as accepting all styles of writing.

[AnonyMouse]

I agree with Cogito on this one: the squeaky wheel gets the oil. If you're getting a lot of SPaG comments, it's probably because you have a lot of SPaG problems to be commented upon.

I haven't been through the review room in a while, but the few times I've been there, I've seen pieces that are so grammatically wrecked I don't even bother to review them because I know my review would be 90% SPaG. I love to discuss characters and plot and atmospere and all that jazz, so it's a major turnoff when I have to slog through mispelled words and lousy punctuation. I feel that if a writer can't take the time to fix these things, I shouldn't take the time to review their work. The purpose of the review room is to get a second (and third and forth and fifth...) opinion on what you've written. SPaG isn't opinion, it's FACT. I won't do what even the most mediocre grade school education should have done.

Now, I can understand people make mistakes; I don't expect someone to catch every little slip-up. But I do expect a certain degree of effort. I don't even open threads that start with "I just thought this up last night and wrote it in a few minutes; tell me what you think." If you submit a piece that is riddled with SpaG errors, you're going to be inundated with SPaG reviews. If you submit something a little closer to completion -- something you've applied a dictionary and a grammar handbook to -- your reviewers may take the time to delve into its more complex aspects.

The last piece I submitted was a 4,000 word "short" story I did a few months ago. Despite the length, I only got two or three comments about SPaG. And guess what, I got plenty of comments about the characters, plot, and themes. The higher the quality of the work, the higher the quality of the reviews.

[garmar69]

Far too many reviews I've seen are primarily concerned with grammar issues/sentence structure/word placement and (maybe) 10-20% content. Usually not even that. Is this a bad thing? Hell yes.


Consider this. If the 'content' is not clear because of SPaG errors, then doesn't it stand to reason that those errors should be addressed first?


No one will be able to make it as a writer with bad grammar, so it's good to correct that. However, an editor does not only seek to correct one aspect of a piece of writing.


We're not editors here. We're reviewers with very different levels of skill and some can't review on the level of an editor paid for his/her work. That leads me to another thought. Why complain about free advice? Anyone that reviews your piece does it in their free time and you should be grateful. If you don't like what you see, just ignore it.

A far bigger issue on this site is one-liner reviews to get two reviews in.

Should our already overworked admin team also scan perfectly fine, constructive reviews for all the aspects that a good editor would encompass and reject the ones that don't 'cut the mustard'?

I think not.

This is a fantastic site and resource for the new writer. If you would calm down and practice a bit of humility, and work with the process, you will find that our members will give you back far more than you could ever give yourself.

[Chad Sanderson]

Consider this. If the 'content' is not clear because of SPaG errors, then doesn't it stand to reason that those errors should be addressed first?


We're not editors here. We're reviewers with very different levels of skill and some can't review on the level of an editor paid for his/her work. That leads me to another thought. Why complain about free advice? Anyone that reviews your piece does it in their free time and you should be grateful. If you don't like what you see, just ignore it.

A far bigger issue on this site is one-liner reviews to get two reviews in.

Should our already overworked admin team also scan perfectly fine, constructive reviews for all the aspects that a good editor would encompass and reject the ones that don't 'cut the mustard'?

I think not.

This is a fantastic site and resource for the new writer. If you would calm down and practice a bit of humility, and work with the process, you will find that our members will give you back far more than you could ever give yourself.

1. If the content isn't made clear because of spelling errors, then that's entirely different. Cogito already said that and I agreed with him. Don't bring it up again. I'm talking about a fully functional piece of literature.

2. We're not editors? If you edit a piece of work, you are an editor. A reviewer, is an editor, if that review is attempting to fix or help change an unpublished piece of writing. Being paid doesn't matter. There are certain things that every reviewer should at least know how to do. And if that's a requirement to post your own work (Which I really like) then don't you think someone should know how to edit just as well as write? Even moreso, since they're doing it twice as often?

3. Who said anything about administrators cutting out reviews? I'm confused. I haven't proposed a solution because 1.) It's not my place, and 2.) I haven't been able to think of one. Just like writing, reviewing is subjective and there is some good and some bad. I was just thinking that if more people had a better set of "general" guidelines to go by, it could make things easier for everyone.

4. You're correct. It is a free review. Did I ever say that if you only want to fix grammar, don't do it? No. I said that it would "better help the author" if reviewers spent a little more time on the content of the piece. Sure, its fine to get free comments, but I would think the entire purpose of submitting a piece of work to a "writing based website" is to get careful critiques. If I wanted a spelling or punctuation check I could just use my friends who don't write creatively. Even they know grammar.

4. Your last comment is a little funny, and I originally wasn't even going to reply to it, but I have tried to be very humble actually. I'm telling the situation like I see it. I said I loved the site and I loved the concept, but this is an issue. Maybe you should stop being so defensive, and realize that, just with everything, there are some things that could be better.

Edit: @Anony Mouse (I like the name, by the way)-- I didn't see your comment until after I had posted this, but I think what you're saying is right. Spelling and grammar is usually a "squeaky" wheel that reviewers focus on and try to improve. But if you can't bring yourself to look past the grammar, then why review it? And if that's the case, you will only be reviewing things that are well written and deep. If you don't think a piece goes any more than skin deep, then there's no reason to write on it any more. But if it hits (or misses) on any level, anything at all, it can be reviewed for content. Saying that a piece doesn't have good grammar is a poor excuse for not examining content, and its seems kind of unfair. That's not a style, that is a choice, and for the author, not a good one.

[garmar69]

2. We're not editors? If you edit a piece of work, you are an editor. A reviewer, is an editor, if that review is attempting to fix or help change an unpublished piece of writing.

You're quite confused.

An 'editor' determines what will be in the final content of a text. Notice I said 'determines'.

Now, a reviewer is giving an 'opinion' about possible changes. See the distinction? They have zero control over what you do with your story. Likewise, you can't dictate what they say in their review.


Being paid doesn't matter. There are certain things that every reviewer should at least know how to do. And if that's a requirement to post your own work (Which I really like) then don't you think someone should know how to edit just as well as write? Even moreso, since they're doing it twice as often?

You clearly have no idea what this site is about. Spend some time reading the various threads and you will soon see why things are done the way they are here.


4. You're correct. It is a free review. Did I ever say that if you only want to fix grammar, don't do it? No. I said that it would "better help the author" if reviewers spent a little more time on the content of the piece. Sure, its fine to get free comments, but I would think the entire purpose of submitting a piece of work to a "writing based website" is to get careful critiques. If I wanted a spelling or punctuation check I could just use my friends who don't write creatively. Even they know grammar.

I looked at your story you posted. sorites spent a good deal of time reviewing it and, imo, did a splendid job of reviewing it. It rankles me a bit that you then post this after getting a very thorough and well thought out review. Like you've been short-changed or something.


4. Your last comment is a little funny, and I originally wasn't even going to reply to it, but I have tried to be very humble actually. I'm telling the situation like I see it. I said I loved the site and I loved the concept, but this is an issue. Maybe you should stop being so defensive, and realize that, just with everything, there are some things that could be better.


I'm sure it seems like one to you, but I assure you, the quality of reviews here are held in strict compliance and you need not worry. You just can't dictate what the reviewer says.



Edit: @Anony Mouse (I like the name, by the way)-- I didn't see your comment until after I had posted this, but I think what you're saying is right. The higher the quality work, the higher quality reviews there will be. And this is wrong. Its easier and much more fun to review a piece you enjoy rather than one you don't. Lord knows I do. But if a bad reviewer reviews a bad writer...I mean, is that what you want? Its also a little unfair. How can less skilled writers get better if even lesser skilled writers are giving them advice?

This is the crux of my issue. You don't even realize how elitist you sound.

We're all here to learn. If you would like a more experienced review, contact one of the forum leaders (http://www.writingforums.org/showgroups.php).

[Chad Sanderson]

Oh my goodness gracious. You completely ignored the topic of the thread and started going in your own way for no reason. (How on Earth am I elitist? I was almost quoting Anony Mouse?!)

"The last piece I submitted was a 4,000 word "short" story I did a few months ago. Despite the length, I only got two or three comments about SPaG. And guess what, I got plenty of comments about the characters, plot, and themes. The higher the quality of the work, the higher the quality of the reviews." I just said the opposite, and get bashed. Thanks.

*sigh*

A. What does the distinction between editor and reviewer even matter (here). Obviously no one is forcing anyone to change their work. Geez.

B. It isn't about writing, learning to write, edit, review, and helping others to write better? Ok. You got me. I lose.

C. How many time have I said that this wasn't about me? I liked my reviews. I even changed some of the story. I said it was gray, because I wanted a content examination, but it isn't what I got. But I wasn't complaining about it. Stop trying to put words in my mouth.

D. Does an issue have to be big? Its an issue. It exists. There are lots of people that don't review content. Does it hurt the site? Did I ever even say that it did? Could it hurt it if content review was done more? That's all I'm saying.

Please stop insulting me. It's getting annoying.

[antius777]

Statesboro, GA? Hmmm, I know an amazing writer from there...

I agree with most of your concepts. I'll never bother harassing someone about their spelling and/or comma usage. These are minor issues that will eventually get resolved by continual writing efforts, further editing, or, well... the grammar police. No, it is the meat of the story, the essence of the tale that needs focused on. We are story-tellers; but are we telling a worthy story?

Interestingly enough, it's an argument I've had before with this SAME writer from where you're located. "The Art of Writing VS. The Science of Writing." I fear this this brilliant author is so concerned with SPaG, so concerned with every word and its placement, that they fail to see the 'big picture' of the tale they're trying to tell.

Much to think about here. My thanks to everyone...

[Cogito]

A. What does the distinction between editor and reviewer even matter (here). Obviously no one is forcing anyone to change their work. Geez.An editor is expected to return a fully cleaned up piece of writing. If you want that thorough a coverage, you have to pay for it. On the other hand, a decent editor would never try to fix the more abstract aspects of writing, such as the plot development or a flat character.

A reviewer, or critiquer, will focus on what he or she feels the writer most needs to attend to.

Another type of reviewer hives a rating to a finished piece of writing based on a variety of criteria. As everything in the Review Room is by definition a work in progress (it is a workshop), we strongly discourage tat type pof reviewing.


Please stop insulting me. It's getting annoying.Keep in mind that you began this thread dictating what was the wrong way to review. If you find it insulting that people disagree with you, then consider whether you might be insulting people by the way you stated your position.

And perhaps highligting that you are "annoyed" by differing reviewing styles was not a stellar choice.

[tehuti88]

Responding to the original post...

I used to critique people's stories until I found out just how little many online writers seem to care about grammar and spelling, things they should have learned in basic school. I would spend literally hours pointing out mistakes they should have avoided or else gotten rid of BEFORE posting their work for review, only to have all my hard work brushed off with, "Well, thanks, I already know about all that stuff, I'm going to take care of it later, please just focus on the STORY!" (They would completely ignore the GOOD comments I did offer. I never, ever offered only negative reviews, but when there are so many errors to wade through, they're of course going to get most attention.)

That taught me my lesson. I stopped critiquing. If beginning writers are going to be so careless about the basics, why should I bother focusing on their stories? If they care so little about the rules of writing, why should I believe they care enough to write a good story for me to focus on? (Why do they even post things with such errors if they "already know" there are mistakes? Wouldn't they have not committed these errors in the first place if that's so...?)

The plain truth is, I CAN'T focus on what might really be a fantastic story if it's buried beneath piles and piles of horrific grammatical and spelling mistakes. As I already said, if there's such shoddy effort put into the basics, I'm hardly going to even believe there might be a good STORY under all that mess. The whole point of critique and review is to get rid of as many such errors as you can BEFORE posting. Don't post for review the first thing you just dashed off, stupid errors and all--polish it up, THEN submit it for comments. That way, it leaves the reviewer free to focus on the STORY. But lots of beginning writers don't seem to understand this, and they get so huffy when hardworking reviewers like ME can't focus on the story beneath all that drek.

I mentioned this elsewhere a long time back. Say you have a lovely garden you spent a lot of time on. You direct me to the window to take a look at it for myself, but the window is coated with grime so thick I can barely see just how wonderful the garden is. For all I know it's full of weeds. Don't you think you should clean the window off before you ask me what I think of your hard work?

Not that anyone is missing out on my reviews. *shrug* But I did work really hard on them and tried my best to be helpful, only to have it all brushed off as "unimportant." There are two sides to this story.

ETA:

But if you can't bring yourself to look past the grammar, then why review it?

If you can't bring yourself to get rid of as many simple errors as you can before posting, then why post it?

The only reason somebody will keep getting lots of "unhelpful" comments on their grammar and spelling, not focusing much on the "story," is if they need to learn the basics first. Otherwise it wouldn't be an issue and such comments wouldn't be so pervasive. Learn the basics, then seek critique. If you don't want comments on bad grammar/spelling, then you can either 1. fix them before posting or 2. not post at all. Simple as that.

[Evil Ferret of Randomness]

I don't have anything to add, so, I'll just say it, plain and simple... GOOD DEBATE!

In order to avoid a one liner, I'm adding this sentence at the bottom. In order to avoid a two liner, I'm adding this. So that I may avoid a three liner, I'll state the Chad has been, in my opinion, the most convincing, in this debate, and that I completely agree with him! But, thats just my two cents...

[Chad Sanderson]

It's nice to see someone that understands this was a debate and not an argument. I respect everyone's points. But Cogito, when someone says to me. and I quote--"You clearly have no idea what this site is about.", calls me an elitist for no reason, ignores the comments "about the thread" and focuses on other things about me specifically, yes, I consider that a personal insult. If I'm supposed to expect insults when posting here, then I doubt I should do it at all anymore. It has absolutely nothing to do with what other people think.

Disagreement is fantastic if no one gets offended, or starts offending.

@Tehuti-- "I stopped critiquing. If beginning writers are going to be so careless about the basics, why should I bother focusing on their stories? If they care so little about the rules of writing, why should I believe they care enough to write a good story for me to focus on?" Because it isn't what you want. Just like everyone has been telling me, it isn't my place to determine what other people do, it isn't yours either. I understand you, believe me. A lot of people don't like my reviews because "it gives them too much to change" (Not the case, only suggestions.) But I can understand your decision to stop. That's kind of sad though, letting a good critique go to waste.

And be honest, is there really that much "crap" here? Everyone makes it sound like they can't review content because every piece they look at is just teeming with grammatical errors and commas splices and who knows what else. I think that is a weak point.

But here is a summary of what I have heard so far:

Content reviewing can usually only be done if the writing is good
There is too much bad writing on the site to content review
Apparently the majority of work on the site is bad writing. (Or else it would be being done more, right?)

I'm not trying to point fingers or say what anyone is doing is bad. Yes, it annoys me when people don't review for content. The same way most people have their pet peeves. But can you honestly say that it would "hurt" if people reviewed a little more for story instead of grammar? Would that be such a bad thing? And even if its not someone's style, would it be bad if that person was to step out of their comfort zone?

What I'm saying is that it should probably be done more. Everyone else is saying--"No. People will review how they want. SPaG is fine." I'll bring this back to the writing comparison. If I said, "People need to use verbs in their sentences" and you said--"No. People will write how they want. Just nouns is fine." Wouldn't that seem a little silly? I believe it was garmar who said "We're reviewers with very different levels of skill and some can't review on the level of an editor paid for his/her work."

Aren't we all writers too? Do we all write on the level of a paid author? Lord knows I don't. Do I still try to do my best? (With the tools I have) Hell yes I do.

[AnonyMouse]

@Anony Mouse (I like the name, by the way)-- I didn't see your comment until after I had posted this, but I think what you're saying is right. Spelling and grammar is usually a "squeaky" wheel that reviewers focus on and try to improve. But if you can't bring yourself to look past the grammar, then why review it? And if that's the case, you will only be reviewing things that are well written and deep. If you don't think a piece goes any more than skin deep, then there's no reason to write on it any more. But if it hits (or misses) on any level, anything at all, it can be reviewed for content. Saying that a piece doesn't have good grammar is a poor excuse for not examining content, and its seems kind of unfair. That's not a style, that is a choice, and for the author, not a good one.
What kind of reviewer would I be if I looked past a piece's most obvious problems? SPaG is the most basic thing of all. Why should I ignore the fact that a writer doesn't have a grasp on the basics?

Also, the mods on this site give you the right to edit and repost your work in the same thread. Fix the SPaG issues that people are pointing out and repost it. Check back later and you may start to see the in-depth reviews you're looking for. That's what I meant by "high quality writing = high quality reviews." I'm not asking writers to submit perfect, polished writing, but I am expecting them to fix these errors if they know they're there. My purpose as a reviewer is to let them know they're there. If you're getting more than one reviewer talking your head off about bad SPaG, it's because you didn't heed the advice of the FIRST reviewer -- it's because you're not increasing in quality.

To me, reviewing content on a piece that has poor SPaG is like pushing a car that won't start to the paint shop. SPaG posts are like saying "here's a wrench; fix the mechanical issues, then we'll talk." And, yes, a basic grammar handbook and dictionary could spare us the trouble. I shouldn't have to hand you that wrench. And I certainly shouldn't have to get griped at when I do. (Not aimed at you, in particular, but at all the posters who whine about their SPaG errors being pointed out. You'd be surprised how often this comes up. I'm just as annoyed as you.)

And, yes, this is my own rendition of Tehuti88's "garden and dirty window" metaphor. Don't bite me for grabbing the Windex.


But here is a summary of what I have heard so far:

Content reviewing can usually only be done if the writing is good
There is too much bad writing on the site to content review
Apparently the majority of work on the site is bad writing. (Or else it would be being done more, right?)
I somewhat agree, but allow me to make some minor changes:

Content reviewing should only be done once the mechanics are solid
There are too many writers on this site ignoring the mechanics, even after reviewers point them out
Apparently the majority of the work on this site is a result of people who only hear what they want to hear from reviewers and ignore anything else


I'm not trying to point fingers or say what anyone is doing is bad. Yes, it annoys me when people don't review for content. The same way most people have their pet peeves. But can you honestly say that it would "hurt" if people reviewed a little more for story instead of grammar? Would that be such a bad thing? And even if its not someone's style, would it be bad if that person was to step out of their comfort zone?
Would it hurt me to review content on a poorly written piece? It wouldn't hurt me, but it would hurt the writer. S/he should be made aware that you can't get your point across when it's trapped under layers of SPaG errors. If I read a piece with lousy SPaG and then write a long critique about how much I liked the characters, that would be sending mixed signals. After the SPaG -- which I deem to be far more fundamental -- is fixed, I'd be happy to move on to character development. In a perfect world, writers would address SPaG before posting, so we wouldn't even have to go through that annoying little step here.

Also, I've already said I love to review for content. I, for one, wouldn't be coming out of my comfort zone at all if there were only content to be remarked upon and no SPaG issues. I pray for the day this forum becomes a place where we can talk content day in and day out without having to wade through grammatical crap. Unfortunately, the world doesn't work that way. There will always be writers too uneducated, too lazy, or just too inconsiderate to fix these things themselves.


Aren't we all writers too? Do we all write on the level of a paid author? Lord knows I don't. Do I still try to do my best? (With the tools I have) Hell yes I do.
Of course we don't all write on the level of a paid author. That's why we're working together to get there.
Take what you get and give back twice as much. IMO, that's what it means to try your best.

[Leaka]

I want to ask a question.
Have you ever just wanted to sit down and write a story?
Have you ever just wanted to finish the story and worry about the SPAG and other problems later?
And when you do put it up for people you want them to look at the content, the idea?
That is why I put my stuff up and all I ever get is SPAG and grammar issues up.
I think as a reviewer we should be looking at the whole picture not just some squeaky wheel.
What about roof, the based.
We should be looking at the whole house, not just the leaky faucet.
And because they have leaky faucet not check every other part of the house.
That is silly and ridiculous.

[RomanticRose]

But, it really doesn't matter what color the ceiling is painted if there is a six-inch wide crack in the foundation. If grammar isn't the foundation of good writing, what on earth is?

[Leaka]

But, it really doesn't matter what color the ceiling is painted if there is a six-inch wide crack in the foundation. If grammar isn't the foundation of good writing, what on earth is?
I think in one of these pages I put down another issue or concern.
There is a such thing as editing your story to death.
It's like a plant you give it to much water and it will die, no matter how many times you have watered it.
I think good writing comes from not just the SPAG, but the rest of the house too.
And I think they should be included.
I don't think that sort of reviewing should be considered not reviewing or not helpful.
I think the it's the whole house overall and not just that leaky faucet.
Do you know how narrow minded that sounds?

[RomanticRose]

Sorry that we disagree and that you apparently perceive me as narrow minded. I just don't equate SPaG errors with a leaky faucet. I see them more as the crack in the foundation.

My first drafts are usually riddled with SPaG errors, but no one -- save my husband -- ever sees the first drafts. A chapter usually has at least three passes to fix the SPaG before it goes to the group/groups. I do that so that the readers may properly focus on the characters, conflict and style.

I'm almost certain that no short story has ever been killed by a rudimentary spelling and grammar check.

[AnonyMouse]

Have you ever just wanted to finish the story and worry about the SPAG and other problems later?
And when you do put it up for people you want them to look at the content, the idea?
That is why I put my stuff up and all I ever get is SPAG and grammar issues up.
I think as a reviewer we should be looking at the whole picture not just some squeaky wheel.


SPaG is far more than just a "squeaky wheel." Although that's the phrase I used earlier, it's so much more than that. I don't see how you can consider it a finished story without proper SPaG. You'd be selling yourself short, especially when the mechanics are so bad readers can't fully understand what's being said.

I've seen your work, Leaka, (and your RPGs, of course). You have great ideas, but they could benefit from a hefty dose of grammatical toning. I don't mean to be a downer, but it's not always easy to look past these things. As I said before, what kind of reviewer would I be if I let a major foundational problem go by uncommented?

[Leaka]

Sorry that we disagree and that you apparently perceive me as narrow minded. I just don't equate SPaG errors with a leaky faucet. I see them more as the crack in the foundation.

My first drafts are usually riddled with SPaG errors, but no one -- save my husband -- ever sees the first drafts. A chapter usually has at least three passes to fix the SPaG before it goes to the group/groups. I do that so that the readers may properly focus on the characters, conflict and style.

I'm almost certain that no short story has ever been killed by a rudimentary spelling and grammar check.

I wasn't saying that you were narrow minded.
I was saying the idea of not wanting to look at the rest of the story just because of SPAG is a bit narrow minded. There isn't just SPAG to a story.
Yes, but I don't think you are looking at what I am saying.
There is a such thing as to much of a SPAG check.
When you have eight post and all of them are about SPAG.
You have so many SPAG issues coming your way, you might try to incorporate it all and your story doesn't have it's vibe any more.
Every writer has a little bit of SPAG OCD and so if you just put them on the war path of SPAG, who knows what they could do.
But I do see SPAG as a leaky faucet.
I mean if you are looking for a home, do you just look at one thing?
Do you just incorporate one thing?
No, you look at the size, the design, etc.
So why does a story be you can only look at one side of the story?

[RomanticRose]

Again, we just see the issue differently. A leaky faucet wouldn't keep me from buying a home. The crack in the foundation would.

Go in peace,
RR

[Leaka]

SPaG is far more than just a "squeaky wheel." Although that's the phrase I used earlier, it's so much more than that. I don't see how you can consider it a finished story without proper SPaG. You'd be selling yourself short, especially when the mechanics are so bad readers can't fully understand what's being said.

I've seen your work, Leaka, (and your RPGs, of course). You have great ideas, but they could benefit from a hefty dose of grammatical toning. I don't mean to be a downer, but it's not always easy to look past these things. As I said before, what kind of reviewer would I be if I let a major foundational problem go by uncommented?


Sometimes you just want to finish the story.
And when it's finish then fix your SPAG.
My first language isn't English.
So I tend to pace and phase SPAG for a while cause I don't how to fix it sometimes.
But I don't just want my oil to be checked at the mechanics.
I want my whole car inspected.

[Leaka]

Again, we just see the issue differently. A leaky faucet wouldn't keep me from buying a home. The crack in the foundation would.

Go in peace,
RR

Yes, but even so...those are just the models of the home.
They aren't what is going to be built later.
Those model homes are like the rough draft of a story.

[marina]

I think this is much ado about nothing.

Go look at the recent reviews - like in the past week or so. Reviewers are critiquing content a whole lot. When there are a lot of SPaG issues, you might see someone take the time to point out the problems, but I see a lot of content reviews too. Often I'll only see content being reviewed.

There are new reviewers who will post one-sentence comments or just say it's good. That's a problem, if you want to talk about a problem.

Proofreading for SPaG is a difficult task. It takes extra time, and sometimes I'll check my Strunk & White or look online if I'm not sure about something. If someone's checking your SPaG thoroughly, it's really a nice thing they're doing for you.

[Chad Sanderson]

Anony Mouse--You made some good points. I like a lot of what you said. But some things are still a bit off. "What kind of reviewer would I be if I looked past a piece's most obvious problems? SPaG is the most basic thing of all. Why should I ignore the fact that a writer doesn't have a grasp on the basics?"

Who said anything about ignoring? Looking past the grammar doesn't mean you have to ignore it entirely. It means you're still able to see the work for what it is. But if the mentality is--"I can't critique something on content if it has grammar errors" then you're not "looking past" or maybe, better-"looking through" the tangible.


"To me, reviewing content on a piece that has poor SPaG is like pushing a car that won't start to the paint shop. SPaG posts are like saying "here's a wrench; fix the mechanical issues, then we'll talk." And, yes, a basic grammar handbook and dictionary could spare us the trouble. I shouldn't have to hand you that wrench. And I certainly shouldn't have to get griped at when I do. (Not aimed at you, in particular, but at all the posters who whine about their SPaG errors being pointed out. You'd be surprised how often this comes up. I'm just as annoyed as you.)

How often does someone fix the mechanical issues and you return to critique the content? How often does anyone do that? (I don't know. I'm just a lowly n00b.) If the policy was first correct grammar, then once the grammar is corrected return and review content, I would have nothing to gripe about....but I don't think that's what's going on. (It would be nice though.)

And I could understand why you would get annoyed at someone who spurns your critique. That would irritate anyone. Perhaps it would be easier/better if people posted the type of critique they wanted along with their piece (Some people want or have different tastes. *shrug* It's seems a little pompous to not give someone a content review just because they're grammar isn't fantastic). Like, content, grammar, grammar-content, etc.


"Content reviewing should only be done once the mechanics are solid
There are too many writers on this site ignoring the mechanics, even after reviewers point them out
Apparently the majority of the work on this site is a result of people who only hear what they want to hear from reviewers and ignore anything else"

So maybe just reviewing grammar isn't working too well, huh? No one wants to submit their writing for review and all they get back is--"red line, crossed out word, don't use that punctuation--" They already have literature professors, friends, etc. Why would someone submit their work to an online writing site? For the most part, it would be to see what other writers thought about their "story". Have you ever submitted a piece of writing solely to have others correct the mechanics? (doubtful face)

And yes, many people need that correction and don't realize it. Heck, most do. Certainly me. But just throwing down red marks and x's on anyone's paper without examining the content makes you more like the old English teacher no one liked, instead of a helpful peer. (You're both doing the same thing. Well...minus the detention and phone calls home. Hopefully.)

"Would it hurt me to review content on a poorly written piece? It wouldn't hurt me, but it would hurt the writer. S/he should be made aware that you can't get your point across when it's trapped under layers of SPaG errors. If I read a piece with lousy SPaG and then write a long critique about how much I liked the characters, that would be sending mixed signals. After the SPaG -- which I deem to be far more fundamental -- is fixed, I'd be happy to move on to character development. In a perfect world, writers would address SPaG before posting, so we wouldn't even have to go through that annoying little step here."

This is where we differ. I think content is more "essential" than grammar. But if I see a problem with grammar, I still try to point it out. Is it sending mixed signals to say you liked the characters but the grammar was bad? That would be...a review. Is it so hard to include grammar and content in the same review? Is it too much effort? Does the person not deserve it? And if so, who are you, or any of us to decide what other writers do and do not deserve? :confused: This is probably the core of what I'm trying to say.

"Of course we don't all write on the level of a paid author. That's why we're working together to get there.
Take what you get and give back twice as much. IMO, that's what it means to try your best."

But it also means using what you know to your full ability. If you know how to review for content, and you don't because of whatever reason, is that trying your best? I would say that's settling for par.

[Chad Sanderson]

@marina--I'm not sure a week of content reviews could be considered a total over-haul or anything...

But I think a lot of people are missing the general point. I'm not saying that content is better than grammar (For everyone. To me, it's more necessary.) But I am saying that you can't have one without the other. They both go hand in hand. Sometimes one is more prominent, sometimes the other. But to completely ignore either is ludicrous. And for the most part, this thread has primarily been a defense for why you "shouldn't" have to review for content, and that just...I don't know. It doesn't make very much sense to me.

[marina]

@marina--I'm not sure a week of content reviews could be considered a total over-haul or anything...

But I think a lot of people are missing the general point. I'm not saying that content is better than grammar (For everyone. To me, it's more necessary.) But I am saying that you can't have one without the other. They both go hand in hand. Sometimes one is more prominent, sometimes the other. But to completely ignore either is ludicrous. And for the most part, this thread has primarily been a defense for why you "shouldn't" have to review for content, and I find it absolutely insane.I've not noticed the problem you're noticing, Chad. I agree that only reviewing SPaG seems...incomplete. I just don't see people doing that. And the reviews you got on your one story didn't do that either. Also, you write well, so I don't imagine people doing that with your stories. They tend to focus on the big, glaring problems, and if SPaG isn't it, no worries for yourself then. I still say it's much ado about nothing.

[Chad Sanderson]

Well, thank you for the compliment. But I have noticed it. (I tend to comb through the posts and read everything, so maybe I just notice it more because of that. I get pretty bored around here (My dorms. The collegiate past time is trying to count the number of dots on our spackle walls.) Like I said, several times before, this really isn't about me. I have no qualms with any of my reviews at all.

(You're right, by the way. There has been about a week of really strong reviews. Which is great. But many, many, many pieces in the past got SPaG only critiques. Or really limited content ones. Or one liners. But that's totally off topic, so ignore it. :) )

[NaCl]

Now, I can understand people make mistakes; I don't expect someone to catch every little slip-up. But I do expect a certain degree of effort. I don't even open threads that start with "I just thought this up last night and wrote it in a few minutes; tell me what you think."

The higher the quality of the work, the higher the quality of the reviews.


For me, these two comments sum up the reviewing decision and expectations.

[TWErvin2]

I've only skimmed part of the discussion because it seems to be going nowhere. Simple answer would seem to be...

Fix the spelling and grammar mistakes before posting a piece for review. Then all that would be left to consider is the content.

If one is unable to fix the SPaG before posting, then maybe that is what the individual needs to work on first, and should be thankful that members are willing to assist in that area.

Terry

[AnonyMouse]

I had a crazy-long response written out, but cut it down to just the essentials.
Before going on, I'd like to clarify that my intent was never to ignore content indefinitely. I prefer to focus on SPaG first, then get to content, not ignore it altogether. One step at a time, if you will.


"Would it hurt me to review content on a poorly written piece? It wouldn't hurt me, but it would hurt the writer. S/he should be made aware that you can't get your point across when it's trapped under layers of SPaG errors. If I read a piece with lousy SPaG and then write a long critique about how much I liked the characters, that would be sending mixed signals. After the SPaG -- which I deem to be far more fundamental -- is fixed, I'd be happy to move on to character development. In a perfect world, writers would address SPaG before posting, so we wouldn't even have to go through that annoying little step here."

This is where we differ. I think content is more "essential" than grammar. But if I see a problem with grammar, I still try to point it out. Is it sending mixed signals to say you liked the characters but the grammar was bad? That would be...a review. Is it so hard to include grammar and content in the same review? Is it too much effort? Does the person not deserve it? And if so, who are you, or any of us to decide what other writers do and do not deserve? :confused: This is probably the core of what I'm trying to say.
I see this is the meat of your point and you ARE right, in a way... but consider the practical effects of what you're saying. When someone writes a story, they have certain things on their mind: a character they really like, a setting or theme they're eager to explore, a story they're dying to tell, etc. It's very easy for mechanics to take a backseat to all that. Look at it this way: If I commented on your character and your capitalization, in the same sentence, which suggestion would you gravitate toward?

Too often I've done comprehensive reviews, covering both SPaG and content, only to see the writer return a few days later with an updated version. The dialogue flows a little better, the characters feel a little more "real," but they STILL can't get the basics right. Yes, it truly irks my nerves.

It's like talking to the captain of a ship, telling him, "there's a lightbulb blown out in the crew quarters and a thirty-foot hole in the hull." Then, he hurries off to fix that lightbulb. I'd rather tell him about the hole and save the bulb for later to make sure he doesn't get things misconstrued. Didn't you go through grammar class before you got to creative writing class? It's the same deal. Sure, one wasn't nearly as fun as the other, but... one step at a time.


"Of course we don't all write on the level of a paid author. That's why we're working together to get there.
Take what you get and give back twice as much. IMO, that's what it means to try your best."

But it also means using what you know to your full ability. If you know how to review for content, and you don't because of whatever reason, is that trying your best? I would say that's settling for par.
If a writer knows SPaG and doesn't submit a clean piece of writing, s/he isn't using his/her full ability. That's settling for par. If someone posts up a poor piece of writing, I'll give them my "best" SPaG review. After they edit it and re-submit, free of major SPaG issues, I'll give my "best" content review. It's as simple as that.

[Leaka]

If a writer knows SPaG and doesn't submit a clean piece of writing, s/he isn't using his/her full ability. That's settling for par. If someone posts up a poor piece of writing, I'll give them my "best" SPaG review. After they edit it and re-submit, free of major SPaG issues, I'll give my "best" content review. It's as simple as that.

But what if the writer doesn't know.
That is rude to just say they didn't put up their best work with their best effort in mind.
They did put up their best work with their best effort in mind. Sometimes you can't catch everything in a story.
To say they didn't work hard enough or to imply they didn't work hard enough is rude.

[AnonyMouse]

But what if the writer doesn't know.
That is rude to just say they didn't put up their best work with their best effort in mind.
They did put up their best work with their best effort in mind. Sometimes you can't catch everything in a story.
To say they didn't work hard enough or to imply they didn't work hard enough is rude.

I didn't say or imply anything of the sort. I said "if a writer knows SPaG and doesn't submit a clean piece of writing, s/he isn't using his/her full ability." If the writer doesn't know, then that statement doesn't apply.

But regardless of the writer's intent or prior knowledge, a post riddled with SPaG errors is going to be met with a review riddled with SPaG corrections. Next time that person posts something, s/he will know what to look for and there won't be any excuse for poor grammar.

[TWErvin2]

SPaG are some of the tools a writer uses to tell the story. A writer needs to learn the tools if they hope for their work to get out of a slush pile and into print.

What else will the editor or agent see, but the spelling and grammar errors first? What will the result be?

And if a writer posts work filled with such errors, then they should learn from the suggestions and corrections provided by those who read and crit their work. Will it (strength in SPaG) happen immeidately? No. But there can be progress, even if it is how to properly punctuate dialoge one post and then learning the difference between it's vs. its and whose vs. who's the next.

A writer who has SPaG troubles and ignores improving in that area because they're more concerned with what other have to say about deeper parts of the story, will not get the quality of crits they're seeking on a regular basis, if ever.

And if a writer has competent mastery of SPaG and simply doesn't bother to adequately edit before posting...well, that says something about how much they respect the time and effort it takes from a critter.

As an editor at a small magazine, I can say that SPaG does make a difference in what gets accepted and passed on. There is never a lack of submissions in the queue.

Terry

[Chad Sanderson]

I see this is the meat of your point and you ARE right, in a way... but consider the practical effects of what you're saying. When someone writes a story, they have certain things on their mind: a character they really like, a setting or theme they're eager to explore, a story they're dying to tell, etc. It's very easy for mechanics to take a backseat to all that. Look at it this way: If I commented on your character and your capitalization, in the same sentence, which suggestion would you gravitate toward?


I understand your point here, and it is true. People enjoy hearing about the creativity in a story. But if you have one author who takes your SPaG only advice, do you honestly think they will suddenly decide "not" to take it once you include content? It would seem to me, that the people who don't take SPaG advice aren't content-hungry-wolves, but people who are just generally not very good with taking criticism!

"Too often I've done comprehensive reviews, covering both SPaG and content, only to see the writer return a few days later with an updated version. The dialogue flows a little better, the characters feel a little more "real," but they STILL can't get the basics right. Yes, it truly irks my nerves."

That is a personal and unfortunate choice of the author to ignore. It should not be a personal choice of the reviewer not to include advice because the writer "thinks" that basics should come first. It's a little cruel to purposely withhold information just because you don't think the author is ready. Everyone has different standards. Why not just...give an entire review? You're already writing it anyways.

"It's like talking to the captain of a ship, telling him, "there's a lightbulb blown out in the crew quarters and a thirty-foot hole in the hull." Then, he hurries off to fix that lightbulb. I'd rather tell him about the hole and save the bulb for later to make sure he doesn't get things misconstrued. Didn't you go through grammar class before you got to creative writing class? It's the same deal. Sure, one wasn't nearly as fun as the other, but... one step at a time."

Haha! That's an interesting metaphor. (A little...dramatic.) But I see where you're coming from. But once a piece that has been riddled with grammar errors is reviewed, how many people honestly come back and write "another" review about content? Usually it's--"Good work. It looks much better now." (Which is a totally subjective statement, I might add) If you can find me a few good examples of that (How you said it should be done) happening, I'll bow out. It's still not what I had in mind. But if there's more than two or three people that review that way, I'll be happy.

@ Terry--I hope that isn't what you think my standpoint is. I've already said, numerous, numerous times, that grammar is critical. If a piece has bad grammar, of course you want to address that. But should you choose "not" to address the content because you "feel" like they should work on grammar only before moving on? Is it so incredibly, impossibly, hard to do both? A review can lean towards grammar. It can lean towards content. But as an editor, have you ever read a piece solely for grammar and then said--"Alright! Looks fine to me!" ?

It isn't about the process. It's not about what should come first. If this were real life, yes, an editor would rip your paper to shreds without even glancing at the story if the grammar was defunct. But once that was fixed, and it got sent in again, an editor would read it for content. This is the internet. Many people are only reviewing for post count. (Not a bad thing.) But how many of those people come back to the originally reviewed piece to look at story issues? As I said earlier, if everyone reviewed for SPaG, and then after seeing the revised copy, reviewed for content, that would be perfect. But normally this isn't the case.

And realistically, how could it be? People move on. Especially over the internet. What if they edit and don't repost? How many times has that happened? (Many) Unless you say so, no one, especially new people, know that you want them to repost their work. Do most reviewers say--"Edit this grammar. Once you get that done, I'll look at the piece again for content." No. Usually it's something more like--"This could be better. Needs a lot of work. Etc." You may mean that you're willing to help more, but I assure you it doesn't come across that way. Wouldn't it be easier on the writer if you just told them everything at once, or that you would only critique when the grammar improved? People aren't mind-readers.

[TWErvin2]

Consider, that part of the reason the SPaG gets marked first is because it stands out and it distracts and detracts from the story. Imprecise grammar and punctuation and spelling cloud what is going on, inhibits the flow of the reading and under some circumstances, makes it impossible to evaluate higher or more elusive or artistic (whatever you would want to name them) aspects of the story.


Wouldn't it be easier on the writer if you just told them everything at once, or that you would only critique when the grammar improved? People aren't mind-readers.

Wouldn't it be easier on the reader/critter if the writer just posted a piece that didn't suffer from prominent SPaG issues?

Terry

[Chad Sanderson]

Consider, that part of the reason the SPaG gets marked first is because it stands out and it distracts and detracts from the story. Imprecise grammar and punctuation and spelling cloud what is going on, inhibits the flow of the reading and under some circumstances, makes it impossible to evaluate higher or more elusive or artistic (whatever you would want to name them) aspects of the story.
Terry

I find myself repeating myself a lot. Literally, in my last post, I said that grammar needs to be dealt with. And obviously, if you can't understand what a piece is talking about because the grammar is so bad, then you need to deal with it. For lack of a better word--Duh. You're talking about the low end of the spectrum, where you can't even decipher the meaning because the SPaG is so bad. What about the countless other posts that have adequate grammar and a story that can be worked with? You don't need to get "deep" and "artsy" to review content.

"Wouldn't it be easier on the reader/critter if the writer just posted a piece that didn't suffer from prominent SPaG issues?"


Indeed it would. But the last time I checked, this post wasn't about the merit of writers. It was about the merit of reviewers. If you want to start a thread on how "Writers" should start using better grammar to help reviewers, be my guest. I'll probably toot my metaphorical horn right there with you.

[Mesuno]

Hey guys, I think this has developed into a very interesting discussion. It's good to see people discussing reviewing principals, even if we can't all agree!

From my point of view I much prefer to do in depth reviews, really picking apart what is written and getting to grips with both content and SPaG issues. I find a review like that can take upwards of an hour on any piece that is of moderate length. That's a serious time commitment so I don't perhaps review in the same quantity as others. Conversely, I would hope that anyone who expects me to read through a long piece of their own work would commit a decent amount of time to straightening it out for SPaG etc themselves. If they haven't why should I commit myself to it in any meaningful way?

A piece that gets posted and gets, say, 10 sensible reviews has been read carefully 10 times by different people. If the author hasn't done the basics to fix what they can in what they have written then they are effectively saying that their reviewers time is worth less then their own.

I'm not saying that I don't review for SPaG (I certainly do!) but that there should be a certain onus on the writer to make sure their work is clean before posting it in the first place.

As for the people saying that reviewing/editing can 'kill' a piece of work - if your piece can't take being scrutinised then perhaps it isn't as strong as you believe. Even if you do think that it is strong, the except that you post for reviewing should at least be clean; otherwise SPaG errors will be distracting reviewers from what you would prefer them to look at.

I'm sure we have all seen TV shows or films which are interrupted by adverts. Well to my mind SPaG errors are much like the artificial breaks. If you ask someone to review your film for plot/content/flow then you don't show them the version which has a commercial every two minutes. No matter how good they are at looking past the adverts it isn't going to look its best.

Long winded and rambling, sorry.

*please ignore all SPaG errors while reviewing my post, I couldn't be bothered to check them myself

[Cheeno]

This has been interesting. I think members will generally review according to their experience and thus, will improve with time, but when it comes to whether or not to review a SPaG-heavy post, I'm afraid I lean away. It's been a pet peev of mine how often posters seem to ignore such basics to get their new work out. I know it's good to see your work 'up', but doing the basics beforehand actually constitutes 'real' work that intils fundamental qualities of reviewing and editing into the new/aspiring writer. It's not just about 'finishing' the 1st draft. It's about making it right to the best of your ability, then going that step further, enhancing your awareness of levels that appear behind SPaG issues. It seems that too many just want to see a response to their new creation, rather than getting intimate with their own work and having it 'ready' to be reviewed. My two cents, as they say.

[Leaka]

This has been interesting. I think members will generally review according to their experience and thus, will improve with time, but when it comes to whether or not to review a SPaG-heavy post, I'm afraid I lean away. It's been a pet peev of mine how often posters seem to ignore such basics to get their new work out. I know it's good to see your work 'up', but doing the basics beforehand actually constitutes 'real' work that intils fundamental qualities of reviewing and editing into the new/aspiring writer. It's not just about 'finishing' the 1st draft. It's about making it right to the best of your ability, then going that step further, enhancing your awareness of levels that appear behind SPaG issues. It seems that too many just want to see a response to their new creation, rather than getting intimate with their own work and having it 'ready' to be reviewed. My two cents, as they say.

See I don't agree with this.
From my experience of writing any piece, I really tried my hardest on SPAG, the G part in general.
But it's very hard for me, but I do try. It isn't that I ignored it, it's that I was really having a hard time with it and I couldn't catch every mistake.
So even if it's still really badly G of SPAG doesn't mean I didn't finish my 1st draft with my best of ability in my mind.
I put up my work for SPAG, but as well as Content.
I figure if 5 people have posted about SPAG why do the others that post in there have to do SPAG as well.
It should be a combination.
But as the same time we shouldn't generally just focus on SPAG.
And that is what a lot of people do.

[TWErvin2]

Indeed it would. But the last time I checked, this post wasn't about the merit of writers. It was about the merit of reviewers. If you want to start a thread on how "Writers" should start using better grammar to help reviewers, be my guest. I'll probably toot my metaphorical horn right there with you.

I believe it is difficult to divorce the responsibility of the writer from the responsibility of the reviewer. In the end, the writer has first (or initial) responsibility for what is posted--the content. What happens after that stems directly from what was posted.

Leaka,

From my experience of writing any piece, I really tried my hardest on SPAG, the G part in general.
But it's very hard for me, but I do try. It isn't that I ignored it, it's that I was really having a hard time with it and I couldn't catch every mistake.

Nobody said SPaG is easy, and for some it is more difficult, but it is something that has to be a priority if one wants to get their work published (if that's your goal). Either that or you'll have to find someone willing to edit the work up to standard--a very good and willing friend, or paying an editor to do it for you).

Here is an article I had published on the topic: Never Learned Grammar? (http://www.fictionfactor.com/guests/grammar2.html) that can explain in more detail what I'm getting at.

Terry

[Leaka]

Leaka,


Nobody said SPaG is easy, and for some it is more difficult, but it is something that has to be a priority if one wants to get their work published (if that's your goal). Either that or you'll have to find someone willing to edit the work up to standard--a very good and willing friend, or paying an editor to do it for you).

Here is an article I had published on the topic: Never Learned Grammar? (http://www.fictionfactor.com/guests/grammar2.html) that can explain in more detail what I'm getting at.

Terry

Well it's more like my tenses. lol!
I'm no good because certain sentences sound nasty this way, nasty to me, but the right way is the nasty way, but it sounds better the other way.

Anyway, I just think there should be an inspection of the whole car and not just the flat tire or whatever.

[Mesuno]

While I agree in principal that you should try to review the whole piece in some cases the fundamental problems with SPaG are so great that you can't see past it. Sticking with the car analogy this can be like asking the mechanic to tune the engine when the bonnet is rusted shut. Until you fix the bonnet he won't be able to tell you anything!

You may not like that he can't see through the bonnet but he's not going to touch the engine until it's fixed.

[Chad Sanderson]

While I agree in principal that you should try to review the whole piece in some cases the fundamental problems with SPaG are so great that you can't see past it. Sticking with the car analogy this can be like asking the mechanic to tune the engine when the bonnet is rusted shut. Until you fix the bonnet he won't be able to tell you anything!

You may not like that he can't see through the bonnet but he's not going to touch the engine until it's fixed.

I think this has been what most people have been saying. And I completely, one hundred percent agree. But I'll hop on the car analogy boat too. If your car has problems, when you take it in to get inspected, a mechanic doesn't only tell you about the bonnet if the engine also needs to be tuned. True, he may place more emphasis on the rusted bonnet. He may say--"You really should take care of this first." But does he pruposely with-hold information? Is that ethical? After all, no one is "forcing" him to tell the driver about the engine tuning. Just like no one is "forcing" anyone to give content feedback.

But wouldn't the driver be pretty irritated to learn that the engine needed tuning months ago and they didn't take care of it, because it wasn't included in the original inspection?

We're not talking about utter garbage pieces here. Just because the oil is low or the bonnet is rusted doesn't mean the car is a wreck. It means there are problems, just like with everything. And those probelms need to be fixed. Do they need to be fixed all at once? Not at all. Do they eventually need to be addressed? Yes they do. Is it up to the reviewer to address them at some point in time? Yes it is. It's also up to the writer to make sure their pieces are edited, but this goes along with what you were saying Terry--about the responsibilities of the writer and reviewer being so close...

I meant that you only have control over what you do. Just like the writer can only control themselves. This thread is about reviewers who have the tools to review, and choose not to utilize those tools for whatever reason. Can you choose to do that because the writing is sub-par? It's not up to you to decide. You don't know the circumstances, you don't know the authors frame of mind, you don't know if they're trying, you don't know anything. The only tangent facts you have in front of you is that piece of literature, and you have the tools to review it. You review grammar, and you review content.

Can you take it one step at a time? Say, work on grammar, come back, then we'll do content. Of course! That would be superb. But there is absolutely zero justification for completely ignoring content, even on a sub par piece of writing. Even if its only a sentence. That still helps.

[Henry The Purple]

I think its good that everyone responds from a different angle...this way, the most important errors are addressed and the varied responses help the writer see things from different perspectives. Also, some reviewers notice a point made by another member and might expand on it. There should be no official standard.

[RomanticRose]

I meant that you only have control over what you do.



I think that is exactly the point. I don't think anyone would have a problem with you saying that YOU choose to review content even in a piece with a lot of SPaG errors.

What came across in your OP was telling everyone else what THEY should do, and in your last post you even went so far as to say there was "zero justification" to not do it the way YOU choose to do it.

It wasn't so much what you said, but the way you said it.

[TWErvin2]

... This thread is about reviewers who have the tools to review, and choose not to utilize those tools for whatever reason. Can you choose to do that because the writing is sub-par? It's not up to you to decide. You don't know the circumstances, you don't know the authors frame of mind, you don't know if they're trying, you don't know anything. The only tangent facts you have in front of you is that piece of literature, and you have the tools to review it. You review grammar, and you review content.

Ummm, yes it is up to each reviewer to decide. Ummm, each reviewer reviews grammar if they want to. And each reviewer will review content if they want to, tools or not.



Can you take it one step at a time? Say, work on grammar, come back, then we'll do content. Of course! That would be superb. But there is absolutely zero justification for completely ignoring content, even on a sub par piece of writing. Even if its only a sentence. That still helps.

Oh, yes, there is plenty of justification--whatever justification the reviewer decides upon.

Interesting notion attempting to dictate to a volunteer reviewer what they will and will not do to meet your notion of...oh well, never mind. The statements stand well enough for themselves.

Terry

[Chad Sanderson]

Ok. I'm not even going to go there. I've been writing about how much I respect everyone's opinions for pages, and suddenly its like I never did. Its ludicrous.

Question 1. (Answer these, Terry. You are an editor, right?)

Are there rules of writing poetry and prose? Do those rules include grammatical and content issues?

Question 2.

Are there rules for writing reviews? Do those rules include grammatical and content issues?

If not- Why? If you say its up to the person reviewing to choose which rules to follow, then would you agree that a a poet or prose writer doesn't need to follow the rules either?

Why would it apply for one and not the other? Why is one more strict than the other? Is each less of an art the other?

Question 3.

If there are rules for both, and the rules are broken, doesn't that mean the writing is not "good". It doesn't follow the rules. You can't have a double standard.

Question 4.

If there is not a double standard, and a reviewer breaks the rules of reviewing, and I call it a bad review. Is that any different than calling a piece of literature that breaks the rules bad?

Question 5.

Does making the review free change anything about whether it is a bad review or not? Yes, its nice. But people on this site "need" to do it if they want to post anything of their own.

Question 6.

If I ask why no one is following a rule of reviewing, does that imply that I'm a tyranical dictator? If so, then shouldn't an editor who asks why an author isn't using correct grammar be a tyranical dictator who is imposing their style on others also?

(And for the record, I haven't said anything about my style...at all. Reviewing content is not a "style" as you so loosely put it.)

[Daedalus]

Here's the problem:

Hypothetically speaking, let's say I want to build a Ferrari good enough to win the F1 World Championship. Now, I don't have a lot of funds to do this. So, I buy an old 1976 Ferrari with parts hanging off it left, right, and centre. I intend to make this car into a world-beater. Should I just ignore the bolts, nuts, and other intricate parts that make up the car, and concentrate instead on putting in a V-12 engine?

No. It might beat the rest of the field for the first two laps, but it's going to fall to pieces before the fifth.

So, if you ignore the main nuts and bolts of writing which, believe it or not, are SPaG, then you're going to inevitably run into problems later on. It doesn't matter if your story is the best thing ever in the world. If it hasn't got good structure and punctuation to back it up, it's never going to make it past a publisher's front door.

SPaG is the main part of writing. Without knowing how to construct a proper grammatical sentence, you might as well be writing in Dutch.

There is one thing, though, that's kind of annoyed me in this whole thing. Chad, you've been a member for two months. Are you telling me that you've seen enough reviews to make generalisations like this? I don't mean any offence, but this site has been here before you came, and I'm pretty sure it'll still be here if you ever decide to leave. I think it's doing pretty damned good, to be quite honest.

One more thing: A reviewer is not an editor. As an editor for a city newspaper, let me assure you that editing is a completely different animal to reviewing. Editing questions every comma, sentence, and paragraph. It rips apart chapters, shortening some and completely removing others. It is ruthless. Don't confuse the two, please.

[Chad Sanderson]

Sweet mother of jumping Christmas biscuits. I "just" said. Twice..no, no. Three times. Maybe even five or six, that grammar is "essential" and you need it to form a good piece of writing. You absolutely can't without it. I agree, it is a base. I haven't denied that one, singular, solitary time. The next person that says--

"Well, if a piece doesn't have good SPaG then it falls apart. Even an idiot would realize that if something doesn't have good grammar it is completely worthless."

I've acknowledged that so many times its incredible. I'm not going to re-state my point if you don't even know what's going on. Please read a little. Thanks!

And, um... "There is one thing, though, that's kind of annoyed me in this whole thing. Chad, you've been a member for two months. Are you telling me that you've seen enough reviews to make generalisations like this? I don't mean any offence, but this site has been here before you came, and I'm pretty sure it'll still be here if you ever decide to leave. I think it's doing pretty damned good, to be quite honest."

What can I say? Sorry? How many written pieces and reviews do you think you see in a day? Guess. Double digits. Let's say fifteen, to be on the low side. That's not even looking at everything. (I read a lot. Like I also said earlier.) Now...multiply that by 30 days...by 30 days...that's about. A lot. even if I only read less than a tenth of that, that would still be enough for me to get a general impression. Do you think I would just come in throwing wild accusations if I didn't think I had seen a good deal of proof about what I'm saying?

I'm not saying the site is bad. I find it amazing. (AS I HAVE ALSO SAID NUMEROUS TIMES!!)

(P.S.: No one is calling into question how well the site is doing....-_-)

[RomanticRose]

You can certainly call any review bad if you like. Just as I can call a piece of writing with a comma splice, seven spelling errors, 5 misplaced modifiers, 2 tense changes, and a dangling participle -- all in the first paragraph -- bad. (Actually, I'd probably just call it "not well written.")

It's not your message, Chad. It's the assumption that if people don't review according to your standard they are doing it wrong that have raised hackles.

I suppose it doesn't even concern me since I don't do online reviews anyway. Just out of that thing that caused the demise of the feline, why does it matter so much to you? You have stated you are happy with the reviews you have received. Life is a much happier thing when you accept that most people are going to do things their way, whether you approve of their methods or not.

Namaste,
Rose

[Cheeno]

Ah yes, the joys of breathing deeply and not taking oneself so seriously.

[Chad Sanderson]

You can certainly call any review bad if you like. Just as I can call a piece of writing with a comma splice, seven spelling errors, 5 misplaced modifiers, 2 tense changes, and a dangling participle -- all in the first paragraph -- bad. (Actually, I'd probably just call it "not well written.")

It's not your message, Chad. It's the assumption that if people don't review according to your standard they are doing it wrong that have raised hackles.
Namaste,
Rose

If you find a piece of writing with seven spelling errors, 5 misplaced modifiers, 2 tense changes, and a dangling participle--all in the first paragraph, what do you say to that person? That their work needs to be re-written. According to "your" standard they are doing it wrong. This thread is no different from a thread entitled "I'm annoyed at bad grammar" and the reply's are all: You can't force your way onto other people's writing. What this is, is a general review of reviews. It's constructive criticism, and everyone is being incredibly defensive about it.

I'm done. Peace.

[Daedalus]

The problem is, you're being incredibly condescending by saying that one person's review is better than another's. Everyone has their own way of doing a review. There are no right and wrong ways, and what you're failing to remember is that you should be glad to get any review.

If you want specifics on plot and character issues, ask for them when you post a piece of work. Otherwise, just accept what you get like everyone else does.

[Chad Sanderson]

The problem is, you're being incredibly condescending by saying that one person's review is better than anothers. Everyone has their own way of doing a review. There are no right and wrong ways, and what you're failing to remember is that you should be glad to get any review.

If you want specifics on plot and character issues, ask for them when you post a piece of work. Otherwise, just accept what you get like everyone else does.

*le sigh* I know I said I was done...but I can't help it. Maybe i meant I'm not writing any more long posts.* Is it condescending to say one piece of literature is better than another? No. People do it all the time. And unless you're the glowing golden boyscout, I'm pretty sure you've done it too. Why am I so wrong, and you're so right? Give me a reason why it doesn't apply both ways? You can't just say, because reviewing is based on opinions. So is writing. So is everything. There are still rules. You can review however you want, but rules still have to be followed in order for a review to be good. The same rules have to be followed for a poem or story to be good. (Like you all have been saying.)

Saying that you should be glad for any review is naive. It's a writing/critiquing site. Reviews will come. That's the whole point. Once again, you have a double standard.

(I guess a short way to put that would be to say-Why? Why is there no right and wrong way to review? Because there is definitely a right way for writing, is there not?)

Edit: Might I add that no one is presenting anything new? Everyone is focusing on the obvious and basic things to write in response. "Reviewing is other people's opinions." "Grammar should come first." "You should just accept what a reviewer says and move on." I have made very clear arguments to every one of these points, but no is answering my arguments. you just keep recycling what you have already said. Hell, in some cases, certain people have taken one, singular sentence out of my "paragraphs" post to respond to, and they weren't even summary sentences!

For example, Daedalus, my dear fellow, if you look back a bit, I answered that exact same question, in fairly good amounts of detail. And instead of proving me wrong, you just re-iterate what you, and the person before you said in the first place. Which would be fine---but you are not addressing my points. Not even acknowledging them. I've tried my best to address everything. If you think a point is bad, tell me. Give me a reason other than--"It just is." Maybe I'll see the light. But right now, this debate is going nowhere. Quickly.

[Leaka]

The problem is, you're being incredibly condescending by saying that one person's review is better than another's. Everyone has their own way of doing a review. There are no right and wrong ways, and what you're failing to remember is that you should be glad to get any review.

If you want specifics on plot and character issues, ask for them when you post a piece of work. Otherwise, just accept what you get like everyone else does.

Sadly, it seems like only one way of reviewing is in place here.
People tend to ignore the questions sometimes, one occasion someone said "I couldn't answer your questions because the SPAG was so bothersome, when you fix I'll help you out on the questions"
How is that helping?
Or they won't review it at all when you put I'm not worrying about the SPAG.
People have different ways of reviewing just like people have different ways of writing.
Some people just like writing it the whole entire story and then edit later.
And so you shouldn't just ignore someones request for some comments or some sort of help.
Reviewers just as well as writers have to be flexible.
And clearly I don't see that.

[Mesuno]

People tend to ignore the questions sometimes, one occasion someone said "I couldn't answer your questions because the SPAG was so bothersome, when you fix I'll help you out on the questions"

Or they won't review it at all when you put I'm not worrying about the SPAG.

Some people just like writing it the whole entire story and then edit later.
And so you shouldn't just ignore someones request for some comments or some sort of help.


Leaka - this is precisely the type of thing which I would object to reviewing. The time it takes you to check your own work for SPaG should be minimal (if it isn't minimal then SPaG really is the area you should be focussing your effort on). To not attempt to correct the SPaG yourself before posting it for others to read/review is essentially lazyness.

I teach (albeit not english) and regularly get kids bringing me scrappy, messy work full of errors. My first response is pretty much always to send them away and come back with something tidier. In the process they usually

a) learn something from looking at it fresh
b) identify and fix their own problems
c) develop a better idea of what needs improving

Then when I see them again we can usually have a much more interesting and constructive dialogue about what they have down. They have their own ideas more thoroughly developed and I can see much more clearly where they need assistance.

If they don't have something 'clean' for me to work with then I can't tell the difference between where they have made silly errors or are genuinely in need of support. Their job, as with an author wanting work reviewed, is to make their genuine needs as plain as possible.

Frankly if they don't come at it with that attitude in mind then I'm not interested in opening a dialogue with them about it.

[Leaka]

Leaka - this is precisely the type of thing which I would object to reviewing. The time it takes you to check your own work for SPaG should be minimal (if it isn't minimal then SPaG really is the area you should be focussing your effort on). To not attempt to correct the SPaG yourself before posting it for others to read/review is essentially lazyness.

I teach (albeit not english) and regularly get kids bringing me scrappy, messy work full of errors. My first response is pretty much always to send them away and come back with something tidier. In the process they usually

a) learn something from looking at it fresh
b) identify and fix their own problems
c) develop a better idea of what needs improving

Then when I see them again we can usually have a much more interesting and constructive dialogue about what they have down. They have their own ideas more thoroughly developed and I can see much more clearly where they need assistance.

If they don't have something 'clean' for me to work with then I can't tell the difference between where they have made silly errors or are genuinely in need of support. Their job, as with an author wanting work reviewed, is to make their genuine needs as plain as possible.

Frankly if they don't come at it with that attitude in mind then I'm not interested in opening a dialogue with them about it.

I never said anything about my work in particular.
But there are other people who can easily pick up SPAG more then I.
But I still think there should be some more attention to the focus of the story and where it's flow is going.
I don't think it should be just one thing.
My English teacher goes over both with me, even when it's SPAG messy. He helps me with both flow and SPAG.
And I think that is what we need on writingforums.
And for me sometimes it is really hard for me to look at the grammar fresh and clean.
I get really mixed up, [cause English has the weirdest rules on the planet],
For me I want both.
For someone else it may just be SPAG or Content they want.
And reviewers have to be flexible with what they the writers are asking.

[Daedalus]

If you don't want people to find SPaG errors in your work, here's a thought: Do your best to make sure there are little or none in it! It doesn't take long to run your eye down a page and pick out mistakes.

Also, so many people copy work straight from Microsoft Word (or whatever word processor they use) and paste it here with paragraph breaks indicated by tabs. Understand this: This website (along with many others) cannot distinguish what a paragraph break is in regards to tabs. So, for that reason, a new paragraph should have a complete new line preceding it.

When those two issues are dealt with before posting a piece of work, it makes the reading process so much more enjoyable for the person.

Now, I understand that all writers aren't prolific at picking up on errors. That's where reviewing helps. By reading another person's work, you learn to adapt your eye to pick up mistakes.

On average, and depending on the size of the work, a review can take anywhere between ten minutes to two hours. The fact that people are getting reviews from others and then going and complaining about them ... well, I'm sorry, but that's bad form. The person has taken time out of their writing schedule to attempt to help you. The least you could do is thank them, even if you don't agree with what they've said.

Again, if you want a review that focuses specifically on a storyline or a plot issue, ask for it! Failing that, PM a reviewer. They've been specifically chosen because they offer helpful, insightful reviews. Give them a PM and ask them to look at whatever particular part you're interested in.

And, for Godsakes, stop complaining. Do you know that some people have to pay for the services everyone here gets for free?

[TWErvin2]

People have different views on how a review should be done. Some are so bold as to assert that there is no justification for a reviewer to do it any other way other than what that individual suggests.

It is apparent that those individuals who feel that reviews should focus on more than the basics of SPaG first, haven't convinced others with their arguments and assertions. I am among those that have not been convinced.

Bottom line, fix up the SPaG (or learn to fix it from reviews that assist in that area) and then the other areas of content will follow, no matter if one focuses on SPaG first or attempts to focus on both SPaG and story content--flow, characterization, plot holes, etc.

Learning to properly employ the rules of grammar and spelling and such may not be the most fun or or easy or as exciting as creating stories and characters and getting to an end product, such are the tools needed to write a story effectively--unless the writer can get someone else to fix all of those other parts for them.

A reasonably close analogy:
It's like someone aspiring to be a carpenter, but they haven't mastered the basics, such as measuring. They design and then cut the wood and piece together a child's tree house, which ends up being far far from a professional end product. No right angles, leaks from the roof, doors won't shut, the floor isn't safe to step on in places, etc.

Then the aspiring carpenter says: I know I don't know how to measure and cut properly, but look beyond that and tell me what you think of the tree house’s overall quality and cool features I've included--even if they don't work so well. Look and comment on the potential of what I intended to create, and tell me how it's working out.

Terry

[NaCl]

Okay...I've wasted quite a bit of time reading this exercise in nitpicking. There is NO right or wrong way to conduct a "free" review. Whatever the reviewer chooses to offer is entirely up to that person who is donating time. If the reviewer was being paid to be a "copy editor", then it's a different matter entirely...the difference is that money creates obligation; an obligation that does not exist for the freebie-reviewer. That said, I do not believe comprehensive (free) "reviews" are constructive.

Reviews should be completed in steps so that the writer has time to absorb and consider each set of suggestions before complicating the matter with the next group of issues. For example, I might choose to remove SPaG problems before tackling specific plot devices. Why? Because the refinement process needs to be structured if the writer is to benefit fully from each element along the way.

A reviewer might read a story and notice several SPaG issues, some unrealistic plot devices and an underlying plot defect. If all those suggestions are made at one time, the writer can be overwhelmed. On the other hand, each area can be cleaned up individually, and you end up with an improved piece and a happy writer.

For me, the order of review is:

1) SPaG
2) Plot devices and storyline (scenes that don't work for some reason)
3) Plot failures (for example, a plot that uses an untenable theory at its core)

One more rule...for me only...I do not review any submission that obviously did not get a pre-screening spell check or grammar check. If the author does not respect other peoples' time enough to invest a few minutes in an electronic screening, then my interest ends right there. On the other hand, I have no problem with "herd" vs "heard" that might slip through a spell check.

Finally, reviewers have different areas of expertise and comfort. There is NO universal format that accommodates "most" reviewers. It is a personal decision based on personal issues for each reviewer. And, it is NEVER acceptable to criticize another reviewer's effort or perspective. (Chad, that statement is not directed at you; it is my general opinion.) We're all volunteers.

[Mesuno]

I started a much longer reply, but changed tack.

I guess that the differences in opinion here are coming about because people are trying to achieve different things from the same review system. For myself I believe that the review process should be about making the writer a better author rather than the story a better piece. It should also be a staged development, working on limited elements to develop at a time.

Helping the author learn how to improve their writing is far more beneficial long term than correcting a plot flaw in one particular piece. I believe that both the author and the reviewer should be coming with that aim in mind. For that process to be effective the author should be continually trying to improve on what they have written before.

This means that when a flaw has been identified by a reviewer in one piece they should actively attempt to eliminate that flaw from everything they write.

A sports teacher here told me that when drilling a new skill it needs to be repeated 100 times. Only after that amount of practice do you develop the muscle memory needed to make it automatic. From my teaching experience I strongly believe that the same is true for written skills.

When I have corrected myself 100 times I should have eliminated my blind spot for semi-colons. Until I reach the point where I can place them automatically I'll be striving to apply them properly in every single scrap that I write; this includes casual forum posts as well as pieces I want reviewed. (did I get that one right?) I don't make a distinction between the two types of writing.

When I commit my time to reviewing I want to know that my time isn't being wasted so I want to know that the author is actively trying to learn from the reviews. Dismissing advice on SPaG (enduring from piece to piece)for the sake of plot issues (one off advice, unlikely to be helpful long term) seems to me daft.

Leaka - you seem to have a very different objective to me when you post stuff to be reviewed. Indeed your forum posts in this very thread have indicated to me that you are not attempting to improve your SPaG on a day to day basis. If you were, you would be using full paragraphs rather than what amounts to bullet pointed sentences sans bullets. Correcting that on a routine basis, while a drag for the first 100 times until it becomes automatic, would make you a better writer. I'm sure that your would also find more careful construction of paragraphs a benefit in your ordinary writing.

Now this isn't intended as a dig, just a observation based on your comments here. I may be way off the mark; if so, please forgive me! (did I get that one right?) Given that I perceive a disregard for, or reluctance to improve, SPaG I would probably feel that my time would be wasted reviewing a piece of your work. It could be much more profitably spent helping someone who is trying to eliminate those errors from their work. Now usually I comment on SPaG, structure and style in a review but I would tend to do that where I feel it is most valued.

Hmm... I feel that I have rambled a bit. (correct use of ellipsis? I only learn about them last week on here!)

I guess I strongly feel that the both the writer and author should work together to pick the metaphorical low hanging fruit. If the author decides to ignore the low hanging stuff and go for the apple right at the top of the tree then I, as reviewer, reserve the right to walk on by and give my time to the person at the next tree.

****
I tried to illustrate what I meant in my own post. Actively practising the SPaG bits I'm unfamiliar with. I'd hope that anyone asking for a review would take on board advice in a similar way and apply what they have learnt to their own writing. Voilà... learning occurs

[NaCl]

I started a much longer reply, but changed tack.

I guess that the differences in opinion here are coming about because people are trying to achieve different things from the same review system. For myself(comma) I believe that the review process should be about making the writer a better author rather than the story a better piece. It should also be a staged development, working on limited elements to develop at a time.

Helping the author learn how to improve their writing is far more beneficial(comma) long term (comma) than correcting a plot flaw in one particular piece. I believe that both the author and the reviewer should be coming with that aim in mind. For that process to be effective (comma) the author should be continually trying to improve on what they have written before.

Just kidding with the "review notes"...LOL

This means that when a flaw has been identified by a reviewer in one piece they should actively attempt to eliminate that flaw from everything they write.

A sports teacher here told me that when drilling a new skill it needs to be repeated 100 times. Only after that amount of practice do you develop the muscle memory needed to make it automatic. corollary from my coach - Only "perfect" practice make perfect. Practice, itself, only makes permanent! From my teaching experience I strongly believe that the same is true for written skills.

When I have corrected myself 100 times I should have eliminated my blind spot for semi-colons. Until I reach the point where I can place them automatically I'll be striving to apply them properly in every single scrap that I write; this includes casual forum posts as well as pieces I want reviewed. (did I get that one right?) I don't make a distinction between the two types of writing.

When I commit my time to reviewing I want to know that my time isn't being wasted so I want to know that the author is actively trying to learn from the reviews. Dismissing advice on SPaG (enduring from piece to piece)for the sake of plot issues (one off advice, unlikely to be helpful long term) seems to me daft.

Leaka - you seem to have a very different objective to me when you post stuff to be reviewed. Indeed your forum posts in this very thread have indicated to me that you are not attempting to improve your SPaG on a day to day basis. If you were, you would be using full paragraphs rather than what amounts to bullet pointed sentences sans bullets. Correcting that on a routine basis, while a drag for the first 100 times until it becomes automatic, would make you a better writer. I'm sure that your would also find more careful construction of paragraphs a benefit in your ordinary writing.

Now this isn't intended as a dig, just a observation based on your comments here. I may be way off the mark; if so, please forgive me! (did I get that one right?) Given that I perceive a disregard for, or reluctance to improve, SPaG I would probably feel that my time would be wasted reviewing a piece of your work. It could be much more profitably spent helping someone who is trying to eliminate those errors from their work. Now usually I comment on SPaG, structure and style in a review but I would tend to do that where I feel it is most valued.

Hmm... I feel that I have rambled a bit. (correct use of ellipsis? I only learn about them last week on here!) Here are a couple links about the ellipsis: http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/ellipse.asp
http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/ellipsis.aspx

I guess I strongly feel that the both the writer and author should work together to pick the metaphorical low hanging fruit. If the author decides to ignore the low hanging stuff and go for the apple right at the top of the tree then I, as reviewer, reserve the right to walk on by and give my time to the person at the next tree.

****
I tried to illustrate what I meant in my own post. Actively practising the SPaG bits I'm unfamiliar with. I'd hope that anyone asking for a review would take on board advice in a similar way and apply what they have learnt to their own writing. Voilà... learning occurs

Funny how this topic excited so much angst. The choice of review "fruit" should simply be up to each reviewer, as he or she sees fit.

[Mesuno]

****
I tried to illustrate what I meant in my own post. Actively practising the SPaG bits I'm unfamiliar with. I'd hope that anyone asking for a review would take on board advice in a similar way and apply what they have learnt to their own writing. Voilà... learning occurs

Thanks for the links. I am, apparently, not using ellipses correctly.

My own quote above should be:


Voilà . . . learning occurs


So, now that you know how to use ellipses, you need to know how to make them. An ellipsis consists of exactly three dots called ellipsis points—never two dots, never four dots—just three dots.

Most style guides call for a space between the dots. Typesetters and page designers use something called a thin space or a non-breaking space that prevents the ellipsis points from getting spread over two lines in a document (6). Also, many fonts have an ellipsis symbol that you can insert, but for everyday purposes, it's fine to use regular spaces between the ellipsis points. Type period-space-period-space-period (7).


More correctly still, the ellipsis apparently implies a hesitant or confused break in thought or speech. A dash is prefered when the break is assertive or confident.

Voilà - learning occurs

I think I will bow out of this thread now.

[AnonyMouse]

^ You forgot to put "Voila" in italics. The word is taken directly from French, so it should be in italics.
(I know I forgot the little accent symbol over the "a." Sorry, I have no idea how to add that stuff.)

Also, I was always taught that elipses have no spaces between them ("..." not ". . .") and there can be four of them ("....") when they're placed at the end of a sentence. The fourth is like a period and can also be replaced with other punctuation if the sentence is a question or exclamation ("...?" or "...!").

See, even SPaG can be subjective at times. :)

[Wreybies]

I cringe at the idea of rules or judements being put forth on the reviews done here at the site. Not because I agree or disagree with any particular camp, but because the average member of wf.org is rather young.

Nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, I think it’s great.

My point is that the general membership is just coming into the world of writing, reviewing, and discussing the concepts of writing and reviewing. I think that pressure placed on the members to adhere to one way or another is only going to lower the frequency of reviews that do occur. This point has been hashed time and again. A quick search would have evinced the fact.


The 8th deadly review…

The Review Review: This is the review in which reviews are reviewed for their adherence to one person’s particular viewpoint of what a review should focus on and what it should pass off as unimportant. This type of review has a tendency to eschew mechanics as unworthy of attention and determines that one can, in fact, build a house upon a foundation of sand. There is a general call within this type of review to homogenize all review methods into one method, thereby limiting the creative, productive, and growth enhancing nature of the review process.

[Etan Isar]

I read this entire thread. It seems people on all sides are having misunderstandings with each other. As far as I can tell, no one is completely in the right on all issues. So, I'm going to give my response to this thread as a single cohesive whole, detailing what methods I think work, and why some work where others don't. And why no method is always right one-hundred-percent of the time. Here goes:

If I had the time to spend four hours a day with a single person talking about a single story, I would use it. Why? Because, honestly, that's what it would really take for me to address each and every issue, and then explain to the writer why those issues are issues. Each and every aspect of writing is bound up with all the others when you are considering a single story. This is the weakness of the "review/critique" system. Unfortunately, the review/critique system is all we really have to work with under the present circumstances. To that end, I will address all my points towards the pros and cons of different "styles" of review that fit within that system.

First point: SPaG is the most fundamental and necessary aspect of writing. Without SPaG, we would have a whole mess of unreadable, illegible gobbledygook that no one could use to communicate effectively. That is why I consider SPaG the foundation on which good writing is built. When a piece is written using proper SPaG, it is clear, simple, and easy to digest. The corollary to this is that a clear, simple, and easy to digest piece of writing does not necessarily contain a good story. The story itself is independent of SPaG. But the way you tell it is not. And as writers, we should be more worried about telling the story well. Plenty of people can come up with an idea for a good story. But how many of them can sit down, write it out, and get it accepted by a publisher? Not many.

Second point: The real reason why correcting SPaG may not be useful to a writer presenting a story for critique is that if the story is full of plot holes and has a fatal flaw or two, no amount of good SPaG will fix it. Correcting the SPaG in such a story is essentially useless. The story will most likely be rewritten, and all those wonderful corrections you have made will cease to be applicable and therefore they will cease to be useful. Why? A writer does not necessarily remember every little thing you have pointed out, and if (as often happens in online reviews) you do not bring them to an understanding of why the mistakes you fixed were mistakes in the first place, they will be no better off than they were before you swooped in on the SPaGflak 4000 and shot all those nasty little SPaG errors to bits.

"Aha!" you say. I was right. There's no reason for the writer to sit there and be humiliated by all those obnoxious grammar Nazis and spelling obsessives. And from one perspective, you are right. But then you have to remember my first point. SPaG is the foundation of all good writing--whether you use it properly or intentionally to subvert expectations. The benefit of a volley of SPaG reviews is not that they teach the writer proper spelling, punctuation, and grammar. (Though they might!) It is that they drive a big spike of "Learn your ****!" through the writer's thick skull and into their brain. Eventually, the writer will get the message, right? If not... :(


Now we get to look at this from the perspective of storytelling: What is and is not to be gained by the so-called "content" critiquing? Well, let's first remind ourselves that there is one more aspect to writing than "content"(story) and "SPaG"(mechanics). What is that other aspect, you ask? Why, it's "style"(all those little techniques the writer uses to make his (or her:)) writing descriptive and engaging). We're talking figurative language, diction, syntax... etc. This stuff often gets divided, with some parts--like syntax and diction--lumped in with SPaG, and others--figurative language, for example--fobbed off on content. Even though "style" as a concept is often considered part of "content". Yet really, those things belong in their own special category(see aforementioned label).

The first thing we need to do is to answer the question: "What is 'content'?" Well, content is an amalgamation of a whole bunch of stuff. It includes images, setting, plot, pacing, exposition, info-dumps, scenes and sequels, action, meaning, characters... The list goes on. Basically, it's everything that makes up the actual "meat" of the story. In terms of storytelling, content is king. But since we're talking about writing, let me explain why there's more to "good" written stories than just the "content" pieces themselves.

First, let's talk about the way a piece of writing is constructed. In order to get the effect you want, you take your goal scene (or image, or chapter, or single sentence, whatever!). Then, you decide how you want it to come out on paper. Next, you look at what method of writing would best achieve your goals. Maybe short, compact sentences will give you that rip-roaring feeling of a good ol' fast-paced chase scene. Guess what? You've slipped over the border into Style-land. Now, guess again: Where do you think you're going next? That's right; you've got it. The next step is to look at mechanics. SPaG here we come!

Now that we've established the linear path of planning a scene, let's look at how you get from your basic mechanics back to that beautiful scene you've got racing around inside your head. Obviously, we're in the SPaG section at the moment, trying to move back towards style. You know you want short, compact sentences that move the reader through the action quickly. First step, short words. Second step, short clauses. How do you make a clause short? Maybe you use one of those poor reviled fragments, or a comma splice. After all, full stops stop the reader; full sentences take longer to read.

The style goal here is short compact sentence structure. The grammar tools to use are short clauses with few pauses, and incomplete sentences. The problem is, "proper" grammar doesn't approve of these things. Shocking, I know. But it's true. Yet many authors use these tools, and they use them all the time. Just like I did, a few sentences ago.

This is where that common complaint comes from: "I can't critique this story unless you get the grammar and spelling right." Painful, isn't it? I think so, too--when I'm on the receiving end. It will be less painful to you once you understand where it comes from. It comes from the difficulty of understanding which "mistakes" are actual mistakes, and which are intentional subversions of the rules to produce a certain effect. When a story is full of real SPaG errors, this becomes even more difficult. Would you want to wade through all that red-penning, only to find that what you assumed was a mistake was a valid stylistic device, and that great pun you complimented was just an accidental homonym? I know I would find that frustrating. Or you tell the writer an image or line confused you, and they come back with a comment about how they misplaced a comma. It's not necessarily that people are that obsessed with grammar for its own sake. It's that their time is very valuable, and a situation like those I have just described is a waste of that valuable time--at least if the author shrugs it off as a non-issue. If they thanked the reviewer for the correction or the question, then it might be considered a good use of time. The goal of the writer is to communicate effectively. SPaG helps that along immensely.

Finally, we get to the move from style to content. We have fast-paced writing, emotion-heavy sequels. All this has been built up to play into the reader’s love of excitement, and to partially demonstrate what the character is feeling during the story. They're scared, the adrenaline is pumping... Basically, we're doing characterization. And these effects are built on style, which in turn is built on a proper use and understanding of grammar. As I said earlier, it's all connected.

To wrap this up, sometimes it pays to concentrate on SPaG, sometimes on content. More often, it pays to concentrate on SPaG, because many writers have not yet mastered that part of the craft. Seriously. In all my experiences doing online critique, this is the area I have found most misunderstood. Maybe the writer is good at plot. Maybe not. But you couldn't tell that from some of the stories they post. You can't really tell anything at all some of the time. But once these issues with SPaG begin to clear up, the other issues come into focus. "Okay, that fragment there is to speed up the pacing. it's not some dumb mistake." That's when you get to ask questions about whther the content is working or not. Hey, no one ever said learning was easy.

There's a reason so many other disciplines focus on the mechanics first, and the product second. As referenced by so many of the metaphors and analogies in previous posts. A note to those who think those metaphors support content more: You are not the person bringing in their car for a tune-up. It is not the job of this site or the people on it to make your story good, or even okay. That's your job. You are the mechanic; and I'll wait for someone to tell me that the mechanic didn't spend a whole lot of time learning the nuts and bolts before he got to assembling and fixing engines. The same applies here, to the writer and the mechanics of writing.


P.S. And just as a note, I myself constantly go back to look at the changes people have made on their stories since receiving critique. That's what the lovely "Subscribe" feature in the User CP is for.

P.P.S. In the spirit of cooperation, feel free to tell me I'm wrong. If you can back it up, you can bet I'll concede the point.

[garmar69]

In the spirit of cooperation, feel free to tell me I'm wrong. If you can back it up, you can bet I'll concede the point.

I think your point is inarguable. Very well said.

[Nikita88]

I read through this and I agree and disagree. Yes, there are a lot of unhelpful reviews here, but I don't think the grammar ones fall into that category.

I find that I am sometimes unable to focus on what I am reading if the grammar & structure is consistently a problem. So what I try to do is go through the entire post with specific grammatical suggestions, and then at the end of the post make a quick summary about what I think of the content, characters, and the world. If there are fewer grammatical mistakes, my content section tends to be longer.

I don't think its fair to say that a grammar review is useless - how do you expect writers to get anywhere if their technical writing skills aren't polished?

[NaCl]

IP.P.S. In the spirit of cooperation, feel free to tell me I'm wrong. If you can back it up, you can bet I'll concede the point.

You're wrong, but I respect your right to ignorance....JUST KIDDING! LOL

[Jason Whitfield]

For what it's worth, I think the review policy on this site is pretty cool. But in all sincerity, I'm not used to being critical, just to being criticized. However I find it does help me personally when I do offer my POV because it makes me look for things I might not have noticed otherwise and also apply it to myself. I guess I should learn to get more in depth in my analysis, it seems to help all around, done in a positive manner that is...

[Chad Sanderson]

That was well said. I respect your opinion, and I think you described how reviewers should generally operate. I myself couldn't in good conscious(?) not review a piece, but apparently, that's just me. I think we'll just continue to do things differently. Thanks for the comments though! I humbly depart.

[Atari]

I agree in totality. The ONE thing I RARELY ever comment on when reviewing is grammar, because I'm generally reviewing a rough draft. It could easily be a typo, an oversight, something written at three in the morning.

It is very unlikely that the writer does not know that he accidentally spelled 'htis' wrong, or that his sentence is a run-on.
When people ask for reviews, they are rarely asking for critique on spelling mistakes, and I think it is more detrimental to nitpick than it is helpful.
Sometimes, you can discourage a person by continually pointing out his trivial mistakes that would undoubtedly be self-corrected at a later time.


I noticed that a lot of people are saying, "If the writing is horribly put together, grammatically shot, the writer lacks the ability to spell and doesn't know what punctuation is, should we still ignore the grammar and spelling?"

Um. . . no? Why does this need to be pointed out? I don't understand why this question is being posed. We are discussing the rule, not the exception.
I will never understand the inability to see the forest because the trees are in the way.
If his writing is so unconscionable that you are unable to wade through the myriad spelling and grammatical mistakes, then he OBVIOUSLY needs more help on that than anything at the time.

It is so obvious that there is no need to pose the inquiry. It's a mute point.

[Cogito]

How rough a draft should be posted for review?

I believe it's less than respectful to put up a draft that isn't reasonably free of SPaG errors and oter mistakes you are capable of fixing yourself. It's like showing up to an interview wearfing a stained tee shirt and with messy hair.

You're asking people to help you figure out what you can do to improve that piece of writing. So if you leave in skajillions of trivial mistakes, you can hardly be indignant that the reviewer targets those and chooses not to waste time on a deeper analysis.

So, do I get annoyed when I see a piece prefaced with, "I trew this together in twenty minutes after downing a couple six packs and some jello shots. Tell me what you think."

You betcha.

[Atari]

How rough a draft should be posted for review?

I believe it's less than respectful to put up a draft that isn't reasonably free of SPaG errors and oter mistakes you are capable of fixing yourself. It's like showing up to an interview wearfing a stained tee shirt and with messy hair.

You're asking people to help you figure out what you can do to improve that piece of writing. So if you leave in skajillions of trivial mistakes, you can hardly be indignant that the reviewer targets those and chooses not to waste time on a deeper analysis.

So, do I get annoyed when I see a piece prefaced with, "I trew this together in twenty minutes after downing a couple six packs and some jello shots. Tell me what you think."

You betcha.


Except that the prospect of someone doing and writing that is amusing enough to dispel most of the anger. ^_^

[Daedalus]

I agree in totality. The ONE thing I RARELY ever comment on when reviewing is grammar, because I'm generally reviewing a rough draft. It could easily be a typo, an oversight, something written at three in the morning.

It is very unlikely that the writer does not know that he accidentally spelled 'htis' wrong, or that his sentence is a run-on.
When people ask for reviews, they are rarely asking for critique on spelling mistakes, and I think it is more detrimental to nitpick than it is helpful.
Sometimes, you can discourage a person by continually pointing out his trivial mistakes that would undoubtedly be self-corrected at a later time.


I noticed that a lot of people are saying, "If the writing is horribly put together, grammatically shot, the writer lacks the ability to spell and doesn't know what punctuation is, should we still ignore the grammar and spelling?"

Um. . . no? Why does this need to be pointed out? I don't understand why this question is being posed. We are discussing the rule, not the exception.
I will never understand the inability to see the forest because the trees are in the way.
If his writing is so unconscionable that you are unable to wade through the myriad spelling and grammatical mistakes, then he OBVIOUSLY needs more help on that than anything at the time.

It is so obvious that there is no need to pose the inquiry. It's a mute point.

If a person posts a story littered with SPaG errors, can you give me one good reason why anyone should wade through it looking for a story amongst the chaff?

If it can be cleaned up at a later date, it can also be cleaned up now. It's a matter of taking pride in your writing and ensuring that it is devoid of any glaring mistakes before posting. You aren't going to get them all, but at least it will look like you've put the effort in.

Regardless of what anyone may say, SPaG is the fundamental part of writing. Without it, a good story becomes mediocre, and a mediocre one abysmal.

[Cogito]

Also, some people classify usage errors as SPaG. They aren't always clearly SPaG, the sentence may parse correctly in terms of te placement of parts of speech, but have flawed semantics.

For example (sorry Atari) the sentence:
It's a mute point.is perfectly legal from the standpoint of subject-verb-adjective-object, and the spelling and punctuation are correct. But the usage is wrong. There is no such thing as a "mute point." The sentence should be:
It's a moot point.Chances are, te person who mixes up the usage won't know it unless it is pointed out. Furthermore, if te rest of thr writing were littered with genuine SPaG errors, pointing out the usage error stands a good choice of going unnoticed.

So it is most assuredly to the writer's benefit to clean up the writing as mucj as he or she can before posting it. If there is still a gaggle of spaggle to wade through, then the writer really does need to focus on that first.

[garmar69]

is perfectly legal from the standpoint of subject-verb-adjective-object, and the spelling and punctuation are correct. But the usage is wrong. There is no such thing as a "mute point." The sentence should be:

I do that nearly every time I write that phrase. I know the difference, I just make the error. I usually catch it though.

[Atari]

Also, some people classify usage errors as SPaG. They aren't always clearly SPaG, the sentence may parse correctly in terms of te placement of parts of speech, but have flawed semantics.

For example (sorry Atari) the sentence:is perfectly legal from the standpoint of subject-verb-adjective-object, and the spelling and punctuation are correct. But the usage is wrong. There is no such thing as a "mute point." The sentence should be:Chances are, te person who mixes up the usage won't know it unless it is pointed out. Furthermore, if te rest of thr writing were littered with genuine SPaG errors, pointing out the usage error stands a good choice of going unnoticed.

So it is most assuredly to the writer's benefit to clean up the writing as mucj as he or she can before posting it. If there is still a gaggle of spaggle to wade through, then the writer really does need to focus on that first.


Well, the word 'moot' means moot >adjective subject to debate or uncertainty


The word 'mute' means: >verb 1 deaden or muffle the sound of. 2 reduce the strength or intensity of. 3 [muted] (of color or lighting) not bright; subdued.


I purposely did not use 'moot' because that wouldn't make sense. I wasn't saying it was open to debate, I was saying it is NOT open to debate. I was saying it was a silly point, irrelevant; mute.

To say, "What if the writing sucks horribly?" Is a 'DUH!' point. That's like me telling you that you can build a house upon a foundation that has a little sand on it, and then you say, "But what if there is ONLY sand?"
Well, yeah, point taken; but that was obvious. If we chased every rabbit and kicked every dog, we would be arguing a single point for years.

Mute does not literally mean what I said; I was using a figure of speech. (Perhaps one that I just invented)

(Cop-out-ish as it may seem, it's the truth.)

[Cogito]

Sorry, but "mute point" really is incorrect.

If you aren't familiar with Paul Brian's Common Errors in English (http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html) (book or web site), I highly recommend. This is what he says about mute point (http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/mute.html).

[Acglaphotis]

That's a great resource. I have about 20 open links already.

[Kas]

On the general topic here... I'll say my piece, then probably ignore this thread. Cogito has my sympathy, as he has to read all of it...



If it can be cleaned up at a later date, it can also be cleaned up now. It's a matter of taking pride in your writing and ensuring that it is devoid of any glaring mistakes before posting. You aren't going to get them all, but at least it will look like you've put the effort in.

Regardless of what anyone may say, SPaG is the fundamental part of writing. Without it, a good story becomes mediocre, and a mediocre one abysmal.

I think that so far this best represents my own view. I take pride in my writing. I know it's not great yet. I know it's not publishable. But anything I post here is something I'm proud of, (why bother if not?) and as such, I make certain that it is my very best effort before I hit the paste button. In fact, I give it another quick going over before clicking the post button. It's not difficult, and doesn't take long unless you're posting 10k words at once (which you probably shouldn't).

With that in mind, there may be a goofy error or two, such as a missing period. But generally speaking, if there are any SPaG errors in my writing then I expect someone to point them out if they notice. There shouldn't be many, so if there are, then... don't leave me in the dark!

If all a person does to critique my writing is to point out a few SPaG errors, I'm grateful. I will learn something, or at the very least, clean up the piece for the next person who sees it. This hasn't happened yet... so this entire thread seems like an exercise in tedium and arguing over nothing. If a single person can critique my writing line by line, commenting on SPaG, story, characters, dialects, similes, metaphors, offer rephrasing, point out all of the stuff that just isn't working, or unclear, or too detailed - WOW. This HAS happened. So again... why is this thread here?

The alternative is that you will most likely get your amazing review from numerous responses rather than a single person. This is how the review system is designed. It's great when one person can point out virtually everything, but it's just plain silly to expect all reviews to be this efficient.

I recently received an incredible review, I think, partly because I posted something reviewable, and partly because the reviewer was just awesome. Kudos to Iaevich! I respect the reviewers who take the time to look at my writing and give me a helping hand. And I respect my writing. Why would you do any less, or post something half-hearted?

Since I aim to be published some day, I'm very serious about what I post here. Why would you hand in a paper that is anything less than perfect, in your eyes, unless you're just being lazy or you are unconcerned about grades (don't care about getting published)? If you don't have the time to post something refined, perhaps it is best to delay until you do have time. If it takes longer than a few minutes (10-15 for longer pieces) to clean up most of the issues, then I'd say you've got a problem. SPaG should be automatic. You shouldn't have to go back and rewrite every line because you never put a comma in the right place the first time. That's a problem. And the story can just hold tight and wait while you address your present handicap!

As many have mentioned SPaG is an absolute requirement to getting published. So if you're having problems with that... be very grateful to those who have the patience to help you with the most boring, tedius, mind numbing, teeth grinding exercise known to writers. Man, give those folks a medal.

In conclusion I'll just say that I thought it was funny when this thread opened... The newbie tells the 13k post count super mod how things should be? ehhm... Sorry to insult anyone with generalisations, but I have noticed that most of the people agreeing with Chad are relatively new compared to those who argue against. There are a few seniors who take up Chad's point, but they seem to be the exception (like me). The site is terrific as is, and this is about as good as it gets.

What really annoys me is that threads like this take a lot of time away from actual reviewing... I highly doubt that anyone will change their reviewing style upon reading this...

Incidentally... When I got that excellent review, the first thing I thought (after joyously rewriting) was: "Well... now I simply have to give someone else a review just as good." So I did that. Got very wrapped up in the piece, and I think I wrote more in comments than the guy wrote in content.

psst.... c'mere.... I think it goes back to -

Show, don't tell:p

[garmar69]

That's a great attitude to have, Kas. It will get you far here and you will notice a marked improvement in your writing.

Kudos.

gar

[Atari]

Sorry, but "mute point" really is incorrect.

If you aren't familiar with Paul Brian's Common Errors in English (http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html) (book or web site), I highly recommend. This is what he says about mute point (http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/mute.html).


I know that it 'really is incorrect'. I was using it as a figure of speech, but if you can't handle improper grammar for the sake of an argument, then allow me to correct myself:

It is an irrelevant point.

Moot, however; is NOT the word I wanted to use, regardless that it is proper for the expression, period.
-_-

[Etan Isar]

Well, the word 'moot' means moot >adjective subject to debate or uncertainty
The word 'mute' means: >verb 1 deaden or muffle the sound of. 2 reduce the strength or intensity of. 3 [muted] (of color or lighting) not bright; subdued.


I purposely did not use 'moot' because that wouldn't make sense. I wasn't saying it was open to debate, I was saying it is NOT open to debate. I was saying it was a silly point, irrelevant; mute.

To say, "What if the writing sucks horribly?" Is a 'DUH!' point. That's like me telling you that you can build a house upon a foundation that has a little sand on it, and then you say, "But what if there is ONLY sand?"
Well, yeah, point taken; but that was obvious. If we chased every rabbit and kicked every dog, we would be arguing a single point for years.

Mute does not literally mean what I said; I was using a figure of speech. (Perhaps one that I just invented)

(Cop-out-ish as it may seem, it's the truth.)

Actually, that is only one possible meaning for the word. The one that seems to fit what you were trying to say is:
From the Merriam-Webster Dictionary
b. Of no practical importance; irrelevant.

See the bolded word(s)?

[Ghosts in Latin]

When I review, I feel that my review could be better. The problem is that I don't know how. A lot of what I review, I enjoy, and don't tend to see a lot of problems. So, I turn to posting what I liked.

I may not be as articulate as I'd like to think, but when I like something I've read it takes me a while to pick out what exactly I liked about it. Perhaps this is a good thing.

Aside from this, I'm not all that confident about my own work, and if you've seen what little work I've posted for reviewing, it's easy to conclude that I'm not that great of a writer myself.

In general, I feel a bit lost when reviewing, even after the various guides in this section of the forums.

[Cogito]

As with writing, critiquing also has a learning curve.

[JohnNoZ]

There is little point diving into the finer points of writing if the mechanical aspects are shot to hell.

I agree. The reason most editors don't spend much time on spelling, punctuation and grammar is that they will just throw the piece away if it has those types of errors or is poor in its sentence structure.

However, I agree that discussing character, plot and dialogue is far more interesting than punctuation.

[Arrow]

Just for clarification purposes, namely my own: Are we, as a community, on this forum going to overlook SPaG when it comes to replies to posts? I'm certain to be guilty as well, but I find it ironic that many pronounce on the expected correctness of SPaG while making linguistic errors themselves.

[Daedalus]

Just for clarification purposes, namely my own: Are we, as a community, on this forum going to overlook SPaG when it comes to replies to posts? I'm certain to be guilty as well, but I find it ironic that many pronounce on the expected correctness of SPaG while making linguistic errors themselves.

That many pronounce? I think you mean "pounce". ;)

Happy?

[Phelan]

I think there are two sides to this issue; what's the urgent issue with the piece, and what elements of a critique benefit the writer?

With any piece I look at, here or on other fora, the first thing I consider is whether, in my opinion, it works, and then I'll crit on what I think doesn't work. If someone has written a good strong piece which works, but which is littered with SPaG issues, I'll tell them that I think it's strong but it needs a bloody good edit. I won't edit it for them, because that isn't my place.

If the piece is lacking something - emotion, passion, imagery, pace, etc. - I'll concentrate on that, because it's more urgent than the final edit. There's no point in polishing a turd, after all!

If the piece is flawed, well ... I'll get to that in a second.

Essentially, I won't rewrite for people, I won't correct errors and I won't add my own words to theirs. Many people do, and I think it doesn't really work. The piece has to retain the character of the author. Many moons ago, I did think I was helping someone with a rewrite. They liked what I did. In fact, they liked it so much, they decided the work was no longer actually theirs and gave it up. I regretted it immensely.

No, what does the writer benefit from? I personally only really care about what people don't like, what doesn't work for them, what stinks. I want to see my work's flaws through the eyes of an outsider. I can't improve if people tell me they love it, or that it moved them, or it made them laugh, or whatever else they might say. I want it opened up to expose the bits that need putting right.

If I had a big growth on my head, I wouldn't trust a doctor who told me it suited my hairstyle. I'd want it cut out and quick. However, there is way too much effort expelled into not offending people. They seem to think that telling them something doesn't work, and showing them why, will result in a bad review back! There are some truly flawed pieces of work on here and they get glowing reviews, so the reviewer can then get glowing reviews back. Are we here to make friends or to learn something?

I knew a bloke once who painted horses. Everyone told him his paintings were first class. They weren't, but he accepted the praise and took it as affirmation of his skill. I saw the pictures and laughed. He got angry, but I had to insist there was a certain humour in cows racing at Ascot. He said they were horses but they looked more like cows. To prove the point, I got people to be honest and the consensus was that his horses looked a lot like cows. Last time I saw him, he was painting farmyard scenes and making money.

Sometimes the truth is what we need most, whether it be to give us a reality check, or whether it be to spur us on. I hate to say it, but sometimes we need it so we can stop wasting our time and accept we can't cut it without considerable amounts of work.

I accept it hurts at times when you read someone slating your work, but if they have a valid point, you'll get over it and learn. However, all too often, the reaction seems to be that the reviewer has gone over the top, or is wrong. No one, in a review, can be wrong. It's their opinion, and that's what you're asking for when you post in a review section.

So, in a nutshell, I think reviews need to be more than edits, they need to address the fundamentals first, and people need to be a bit more honest in these forums when dealing with work that doesn't cut it. It shouldn't be about mutual support, there's places for that, it should be about learning what others think of your work. After all, those readers out there won't accept bad work just because the writer cares about it.

[Kas]

Just for clarification purposes, namely my own: Are we, as a community, on this forum going to overlook SPaG when it comes to replies to posts? I'm certain to be guilty as well, but I find it ironic that many pronounce on the expected correctness of SPaG while making linguistic errors themselves.

Casual posts, by their conversational nature, tend to be rather less than great literary works... With that said, this is one of the best forums around (from my experience) when it comes to casual posting. At least no one is using l337 speak for every other word. The problem is when people treat their literary offerings like casual posts...

[Cheeno]

I've recently doled out a sizable chunk of my hard earned cash to have my novel of 95,000 words reviewed. I received the editor's feedback a couple of days ago and am currently digesting her comprehensive, honest, constructive, no punches pulled, report. It's exactly what I needed. Without her professional approach, I would still be unaware of elements I need to revisit to bring my work to a publishable standard.

We don't know how lucky we are on this forum. We receive 'free' reviews of our work! Sure, some members haven't much experience and can only give what they can, but others most certainly go out of their way to provide quite a detailed and comprehensive service we would otherwise have to pay for.

The opportunity to analyse work and construct a review, while having many other reviewing samples to learn from is invaluable to us as aspiring/emerging writers. We need to appreciate what we have instead of carping on about the varying methods of members. Everyone's different, thank goodness. Be honest and constructive in your work and appreciative in what your receive.

[Arrow]

Casual posts, by their conversational nature, tend to be rather less than great literary works... With that said, this is one of the best forums around (from my experience) when it comes to casual posting. At least no one is using l337 speak for every other word. The problem is when people treat their literary offerings like casual posts...

What is "1337 speak?"

[Kas]

What is "1337 speak?"

Using numbers in place of letters, among other things. Generally screwing up the writing to such an extent that you need a decoder guide to understand what someone is saying. In that case... I don't bother to read it. It's pretty common elsewhere on the net, particularly in gaming communities where the term "l337 speak" (elite speech) was coined...

I'm well accustomed to reading nonsensical crap elsewhere, so the posts here seem exceptionally clean to me.

And for that I am thankful.:)

[St Saint]

If you need an example;

1337 Speak - "747 W45 57U91D!!!!!!"
Normal Speech - "That was stupid!"

[Cogito]

Yes, we strongly discourage the use of netspeak in posts here. It is a writing forum.

No foul for giving the example, but please let's leave it at that, and get back on topic.

[St Saint]

Yes, we strongly discourage the use of netspeak in posts here. It is a writing forum.

No foul for giving the example, but please let's leave it at that, and get back on topic.

Sorry for that, just wanted to clarify.

[TyroScribe]

Chad, I see where you're coming from with the review strategies. Editing and revising shouldn't simply be about fixing grammar and spelling mistakes. However when you think about it, it's a must. Let me try to put it a different way. Perhaps this will help me make my point.

Let's say I'm at a cafe and I order a club sandwich with a nice side of fries and a tall glass of tea. I'm really hyped about getting that plate of food in front me when all of a sudden I see the waitress carrying my food out to me on the inside of a trashcan lid.

That is what a piece of writing with bad grammar is like. It becomes less about the content (or the club sandwich with fries) and more about the presentation. The grammar is the first impression that the audience gets. If the writer didn't take enough time to correct those mistakes, the audience must wonder if the author cared enough about the actual content.

Now granted, I agree that good editors should see the reviewing process through more than just a spellchecker's lense. I absolutely think that editors should help authors with clarity and ways to better develop their points. After all, that is where most authors have trouble and why many just stop in their tracks. In my opinion, the thing that separates good editors from great editors is their ability to carefully balance grammar checks and content checks.

A lot of people here have stated that new members don't always feel comfortable critiquing someone else's work because they don't feel adequately informed to do so. I understand that point and I don't even feel comfortable offering advice all the time. I'm just someone in college who has had a few English courses. It certainly doesn't make me an expert. But what makes anyone an expert? In my opinion, writers are always growing and always learning. Language isn't something that can ever be completely mastered.

I guess my point is that input is valuable no matter what English background a person has. Everyone has their own ways of interpreting information and there's never one set way that is correct. Writers can target a specific audience all they like but that won't stop other types of people from reading their work. That's the terrific thing about writing: it allows us to synthesize our content using methods that can be universally understood. And perhaps that is why writing and the editing process will never die out. :)

[litilraven]

Warning: Opinion follows!

Gosh! I feel so drained from this whole thread. It feels like I've been beaten to death before I ever posted.

I have read nearly all of this thread. I have to say you can learn a lot about people's personalities in here, and some are pretty awesome.

The majority of this whole community has not had the chance to see "my" personality yet. I hope it is well received, however, I must admit I am very opinionated.

There are those who, when they paint, do not need a background. They do not need the build-up. They need no history, no specifics. They just put the blank canvas in front of themselves, dip the paint brush, and voila! A masterpiece is born. I envy those people, truly.

Then there are those who, when they paint, must decide which canvas to buy that will work well with which paint. They do background research so that they know "how" a particular building is supposed to look during a particular era. Then they gently sketch, erase, sketch, erase. Finally they paint.

What happens if that artist takes that to market and it never sells? Of course everyone says "Wonderful content!", or "Beautiful colors!". And perhaps if asked, those same potential buyers would tell you that they didn't buy the gorgeous painting because the pencil sketches were showing through the paint. The artist never took the time to "fix" what could have been fixed before trying to sell it at the market. Of course, because the pencil sketches could be seen, they took away from the true artistry in the end.

If I review a piece and there are a gazillion SPaGs, then THAT is what jumps out at me. I don't ask my brain to hone in on it, it's just there and I cannot miss it. I have tried to read through the SPaGs and all I end up with in the end is a lot of frustration. Each time I try to read for content, or style, plot anything, a SPaG jumps out at me!

It's like...when you talk to the most gorgeous man, or most beautiful woman and they accidently spit in your face while talking to you. Where do you think that original view goes when all you can concentrate on is that nagging wet germ-riddled spot on your cheek. That man/woman is no longer gorgeous or beautiful, they are now disgusting and you can't get this new picture out of your head.

So, Although everyone understands what you're "trying" to say Chad, there are somethings that are just natural reactions that some have a hard time getting passed. SPaG is a problem for me. You could write the worlds ultimate best story, but if it has so much SPaG that I have to keep stopping and backing up to re-read for understanding then what's the point?

I mean I understand that not everyone has the same level of education. There "are" ways of fixing that problem aside from going back to school. If one wanted, they could take the initiative and contact a librarian for some help. There are tutor volunteers. Friends and relatives will often say yes if you ask them to help with your grammar......but for God's sake, run the dang spell check before you post, lol

If mistakes are minimal, I don't have a problem at all. THAT is when I can see the content, style, plot, characters etc.

Oh, and by the way... "my" personal worst habit is using elipses. I have to work on that every time I set my fingers to the keys. It's down right irritating, lol

[Paki-Writing]

many of the poor reviews on this site come from those with very few posts (new members). Keep in mind that those who are new to this may not be very comfortable offering advice, especially when they may be the ones most in need of it.


This is me!!!!!!!


Sweet mother of jumping Christmas biscuits.


lol. I can see your point, and I think a lot of other members also do see your point. However, I don't understand why you don't see theirs. If someone made a car without wheels, an engine, and a steering wheel, you're not going to tell them how well the car drives! Similarly, if someone's grammar is so off that it's almost unintelligible, the person needs to improve in their SPaG before they improve in their ability to tell a story. You may say, "Why not do both, improve their grammar and their ability to tell a story." Because you can't tell a person how well their car drives if it doesn't have an engine and wheels! You REALLY need to improve on your SPaG to at least a decent level before you worry about content. Then, and only then, can one start thinking of how well to tell a story.

In summary, give the car an engine and some wheels before expecting reviews on how well it drives.


There is no such thing as a "mute point." st.

But there is!!! loool. It's the point something makes no sound! [I'm just messing!!!]

[Prettyroser]

Yeah, I know what you mean Liliraven. I wonder what people will think of my personality too :)

I have wondered about some of the reviews here. Of course, advice is always great. I love seeing someone comment about my work even when it's not kind. In fact, I like it when they really examine the piece because that helps me the most.

While no one has to give an in-depth review to anyone, I still think it's important that people understand the difference between a helpful review and an unhelpful review. I think knowing how to give a helpful review can help you tremendously as a writer because being able to understand why you think someone else s writing is weak can help you to see the weakness in your own writing.

Now we can all say, every review is helpful just by the fact that they are saying something, but that's like saying your boss walking up to you to tell you 'Good job' after you accidentally set all the offices computers on fire is helpful. First, it's really confusing because how is it a good job? What was good? Should you set more office computers on fire? Is that what he wants? Or was he just afraid to tell you the truth?

To me, telling someone good job when they clearly have real problems in their writing is not helpful, but really a disservice. When you critique someone think of yourself as either their reader or their publisher? Would you really buy their story? Would you really publish their work?

For example, I read one story that opened with 'charging anticipation' and another that had 'dust and grease coagulated to a coat'. They continued in much the same manner. Which is okay because this site is just the place for developing writers. What I found disheartening was not the stories but some of the reviews they had received.

Reviews like "wow, this is terrific writing." I wondered are the reviewers only posting so they can up their posts enough in order to post their works online for review? Or do they really think blind encouragement counts as a helpful review.

I think if those reviewers truly think opening with 'charging anticipation' is good writing than they really need this site. Also I feel many reviewers think that the way they can improve their writing is by getting critiques on their own writing and they undervalue what being a good at critiquing can do for your own writing.

I think the best way to improve your own writing is to know how examine the works of others. To me, that's not by examining their grammar only or by telling them their wonderful without giving a reason, but by giving your honest opinion and describing your reasoning for that opinion.

Ultimately when I post here, I hope to hear a true opinion not some 'oh your wonderful'. Not that I don't love any comment, but I still hope for a real critique (and I've gotten some nice ones) Why? The reason is because I feel I can take it and in the publishing world I don't think they are nice and flattering to new writers. Real writers will tear you apart and you better be willing to not only take it, but to fight for your writing.

Summary: I don't completely agree with Chad, but I do think that its very important for developing writers here to know the difference between a critique and a comment. The reviews I see on most stories so far are usually just comments, not critiques.

[Castlesofsand]

I missed this thread somehow.

I agree with what you said prettyroser, there is a vast difference between a comment and a critique or a review( i believe a review is less indepth than a critique which can follow a grid to make it easier to breakdown points )

it is important to gain others' views of your work, sadly a great many people believe their writing or opinion is not up to giving such, this is not the case though. Everyone can teach something, learn something from another. we all have talents to share. but worrying about what others will say, stop them.

I like critiques, but don't mind comments if that is what they wish to give. Sometimes just letting me know they like it is enough from some but not all. I'm here to learn.

give an opinion, its yours to give, so why not exercise it? They can take it or not but if something doesn't read write to you, give a helping hand and point it out. If the writer doesn't choose to look, then they aren't here to learn, instead just want to post pieces.

I usually ask if they want a detailed critique, it takes more time as i go through it carefully. It doesn't have to be 'harsh'(never understood what that word has to do with critiquing) it has to be truthful and you can do that without slander or being rude. Mention the good and the parts that need to be made better. sometimes what you think you see isn't what's there and you end up learning too.

another interesting thread.

thanks for the reads

[Humpty-Dumpty]

I'm guilty of everything Chad has mentioned. :(

I must say this in my defense, though: these are the first reviews I've ever done. :3

[Okie]

I just joined this forum a day ago. I'm totally new to all of this. I'm not a published writer, nor do I have any experience editing. This isn't even my native language. I failed english as a foreign language for 5 years, when it was forced on me in german highschool.

I learned to speak in english first. Believe it or not, I couldn't read at all back in 1992, when I moved here. I picked up books at the grocery checkout line to try and teach myself to read. And after I chewed my way through hundreds of romance, sci-fi, and horror novels, I could read.

I can write now, it's been almost 20 years afterall. But could I tell someone how to spell or tell them why exactly does that sentence sound weird? No, probably not. I can tell you how it made me feel. I can tell you what part seemed odd, and I can try to explain why.

When I came to this site, the one thing that stood out to me was the review process. I like having to push myself outside of my comfort zone. I am sure if I post a review, that what I am saying there rings true, to me at least. If you're looking for technical advice though, I'm not educated enough to tell you the why's and how's.

I saw some of the reviews with red font, pointing out all the details, and that's great, very precise to be sure. But please don't expect me to be able to do that. Seeing as I really have no idea what I'm talking about, aside from how a particular piece of writing made me feel.

[Credulous Skeptic]

Grammar is just as important as the telling of the story.

[xxtake_controlxx]

I completely agree with you, Chad. Yes, fixing grammar is fantastic, but that's usually something easily fixable, and and sometimes, SPaG mistakes are merely because the writer didn't read his or her own work carefully enough to catch those mistakes. Especially in stories, I find that the development of the characters - their interactions, their dialogue, their emotions, etc. - is more important to perfect than the grammar because, more often than not, an err in the development of a character is not something seen by the writer. Reviews commenting along those lines - or about the message, tone, lense, etc. - are much more helpful than a response merely correcting some faulty grammar or spelling.

At the same time, comments that merely state something is wrong - which is something I've probably done - is also not helpful to the fullest extent. Just saying something along the lines of, "I don't think this character acted in the way that he or she should have in situation x," is not helpful. Instead, it's much more helpful to say what was wrong and WHY it was wrong. Sometimes it's even good to offer a way to correct it to point the author in a direction that you think would better suit the story. I mean, the author doesn't even have to take the advice or suggestion, but the more specific the comment is, the better.

I just joined the site a couple days ago, but in all of my comments, I try to focus on the content of the writing, the emotion, the development, the feelings, the message. If I do see SPaG errors, I'll mention that there are them and offer to point them out if the writer wants, but it's not a focus of my reviews.

[sophie.]

I agree with the point that there are some unhelpful reviews posted here - especially from new members. When I was a new member, my reviews were completely useless, until I'd got used to the site and realised how to change.

Even now I'm sure some of my reviews are a bit rubbish, but I'm learning :p and try to be helpful, whereas before I just skimmed the piece and tapped out a couple of sentences, platitudes, vague advice.

Most people learn how to review after their first few posts (or after one of their threads is locked!) and soon realise the point to it...when they 'know their way round' the site and feel more familiar, start recognising members etc.

Perfunctory reviews are irritating, esp when they say stuff like "I thought this was pretty good" or "the last line brakes (sic) the flow and I think you spelt 'sulphur' wrong" - those are a couple of reviews I have had, esp. irritating when your SPaG is wrongly corrected by someone who spelt their own words wrong! It takes time for people to realise that those sorts of reviews are unhelpful; this often happens after they post their own stuff and receive equally unhelpful reviews back. Then, they know what it feels like!

God what a load of waffle I just typed...:p

[Castlesofsand]

well truth, the story is important, but the review is giving through another pov, it might not be agreed upon by the writer, but it should not be simply ignored because they don't.

[ricardo_85]

Well my view on this is that if the spelling, punctuation and grammar are of a good standard to start with, then the reviewer wouldn't need to correct it in the first place. You can’t have a good story with bad grammar.
If the grammar etc is correct then the reviewer can focus more on the writing its self and how they think it could be improved. Also about the quality of the reviews a think people just do the minimum amount that will allow there work to be reviewed and rush it too.
I’m wanting to put my work up here to get reviewed, but am waiting till I have read a few more reviews, before I review other peoples work as I’m not wanting to give a bad one.

[Castlesofsand]

i don't understand that policy ricardo.

what is a bad review? if you can post a story for review you must have an idea of what a story needs, so why wait to share that?

[garmar69]

I think ricardo means he would like to be well informed before he does a review. There's nothing wrong with not jumping in head first into the review room. It is the most advanced area of this website and can be very intimidating. Studying how others do it is a good start imo.

[Cogito]

Nevertheless, the only way to get better at critique is to actively work at it. You won't ruin anyone's writing by making suggestions. The author STILL must make the choice of what suggestions to use and which to pass on. That is another raspect of the Review Room, one that probably gets less attention than most.

[Castlesofsand]

I agree with Cogito,

to me its not an excuse saying you aren't ready. if you can write a story, then you can review one. you learn from both sides each person does.

[garmar69]

I agree with Dave also. I also feel that spending some time getting the general feel for how it's done is a good idea.

A lot of people who have written stories have done their two "reviews" then posted a story only to have it locked because the reviews weren't within the site guidelines of being constructive. See how a little research before jumping right in can help prevent this?

Get in there and do some reviews. If you're still in doubt whether they are acceptable, PM Cogito before you post your story. I'm sure he will be glad to steer you in the right direction.

[Lyssaur]

I read through the first couple of pages. I'm not going to read them all, but here's my two cents:

Everyone here is on a different skill levels of writing and reviewing. Some people, as it has been addressed, maybe only be able to give back SPaG reviews. If you are interested in a content related review, why not just write that when you post your story? I'm sure sticking in a "I would prefer opinions on my content rather than my grammar, please (:" would solve both yours, and anyone else's problem with the reviews.

[Etan Isar]

Next time maybe look for a thread less than a year old. ;)

[Lyssaur]

Haha, I know. xD I just was browsing and wanted to make a comment on it!

[John Horace]

I have not read the whole thread, so pardon me if I say something foolish.

No more excuses. Stop leaning on grammar and mechanics as a crutch. You're not improving by critiquing grammar, you are hiding behind a chair. I encourage every noob from the very beginning to review and think about content, mood, theme, character, plot, description, and all the higher methods of writing.

If you say that you are weak. Then get stronger. If you don't, then you will remain weak. End of story.

[Cogito]

There's a lot of truth to that, John, but it's not the whole story.

If you are reading a piece of writing that is so thick with grammar and punctuation issues to be painful to read, by all means your advice should address it. Good spelling, grammar, and punctuation (SPaG) is not optional in writing. And if you, the critiquer, have problems with SPaG, then finding and coirrecting SPaG issues in other people's writing will be valuable both to you and the writer.

But if you have a sloid grasp on SPaG, you are better off trying to tackle the more abstract issues, like pacing versus meticulous description, or dialogue effectiveness, or strong imagery.

You do want to help the writer, but you also should be helping yourself by attempting increasingly ambitious writing issues.

[Etan Isar]

It's important to realize that most work posted here is relatively short. So in many cases, especially in the Novel section, for instance, it may not be possible to have a grasp on all of the larger issues.

While on the one hand most of the stories here would never be submitted as posted, and thus SPAG critique is rather unlikely to effect the finished piece, it's certainly valid as a learning experience for both the writer and critiquer. As far as the nuts and bolts of writing go, SPAG is tops. If we're talking about the story/narrative, then yes, the above-mentioned issues are probably more important.

[shawsend]

My opinion: grammar is of paramount importance. I'm not even sure I would continue reading the piece if it were loaded with grammatical errors at the start. It just makes common sense to me: start with a strong foundation and that which you build will last. So I suggest get the grammar right first, then start worrying about other components of good writing style.

[minstrel]

SPaG is a prerequisite. A writer should have learned decent SPaG in grade school, and certainly long before joining writingforums.org.

Because of that, it's hard to see bad SPaG as anything other than evidence of general incompetence and carelessness on the part of the writer. It's nearly impossible for me, as a reader, to trust an incompetent writer. Reading work by an incompetent writer is kind of like going into the jungle with an incompetent wilderness guide. You will get lost and you will eat the wrong foods and you won't know to avoid the poisonous animals and you'll probably die. Metaphorically speaking.

I don't want to bother reviewing a work's plot and characterization and pacing and theme and so on if the SPaG is bad - I don't even want to read it. I don't trust the writer. So if I saw a work with bad SPaG and I did, for some reason, comment on it, the comment would say "Learn SPaG and come back when you're ready."

[mgresart]

I agree! Any basic spell check can tell you where to put your punctuation or that you've spelled something wrong. What writers need to improve is emotion in reviews. Maybe we should all be asking ourselves basic questions like:
What would make me connect with this piece more?
What am I feeling while reading this?
Do I understand what I'm reading?

(Obviously, I could go on like that forever, but I'll spare you.)

We're not robots here, so we shouldn't review like we are. :)

[Cogito]

Basic spell check will not correct punctuation, nor will it catch spelling errors in which the misspelling is also a word (but incorrect in the current context). And no spell checker will suffice if the member hasn't bothered to use it.

The simple fact is that a substantial percentage of posts submitted for critique are laden with spaeeling, punctuation, and grammar (SPaG) errors, and writers should be made aware that fixing such mistakes has to be the first order of business.

WHATEVER the weakest component of a submitted piece is, as perceived by the critiquer. should be the focus of the critique.

The critiquer will learn much more by tackling the more subtle issues. The Review Room is a workshop for learning effective critique, so why waste time critiquing a sloppily written piece when there are far more challenging pieces to critique?

[mgresart]

Basic spell check will not correct punctuation, nor will it catch spelling errors in which the misspelling is also a word (but incorrect in the current context). And no spell checker will suffice if the member hasn't bothered to use it.

The simple fact is that a substantial percentage of posts submitted for critique are laden with spaeeling, punctuation, and grammar (SPaG) errors, and writers should be made aware that fixing such mistakes has to be the first order of business.

WHATEVER the weakest component of a submitted piece is, as perceived by the critiquer. should be the focus of the critique.

The critiquer will learn much more by tackling the more subtle issues. The Review Room is a workshop for learning effective critique, so why waste time critiquing a sloppily written piece when there are far more challenging pieces to critique?

Okay, that was my fault, I used a bad example/bad wording. My point was just that people tend to focus more on SPaG errors and sometimes don't even consider how they're reacting emotionally to the pieces they're reading. I understand where you're coming from, though.

[Wreybies]

Okay, that was my fault, I used a bad example/bad wording. My point was just that people tend to focus more on SPaG errors and sometimes don't even consider how they're reacting emotionally to the pieces they're reading. I understand where you're coming from, though.

Of course this happens. It happens for more than one reason.

1) The person reviewing is not comfortable with the process to get to those levels in a critique. Many people are new to the process and aren't "there" yet.

2) The work itself is so SPAG riddled that the person doing the critique cannot see past it. And yes, that is a real phenomenon.

When people tell me, "I know it's full of mistakes, but am I getting my point across?" the answer is no, no you are not.

[k.little90]

2) The work itself is so SPAG riddled that the person doing the critique cannot see past it. And yes, that is a real phenomenon.

When people tell me, "I know it's full of mistakes, but am I getting my point across?" the answer is no, no you are not.

Exactly, Wreybies! I find myself more and more annoyed when people post things beginning with "I know the formatting sucks," or "I haven't really edited it...."

When people post on this site, I assume that they are posting for someone to review their writing style and story content. SPag errors just get in the way of that.

Now, I know everyone isn't perfect; I myself have always struggled with punctuation. However, when I post a piece, I always try to make sure that my spelling and grammar are acceptable so that the reviewer can hopefully mainly focus on my writing style and content. If I learn a punctuation lesson along the way, so be it, but I don't think reviews should be based souly on SPaG.


Clean up your posts, people! :p

[violetinsideme]

I am a "newb" and try to express I am not comfortable with crticising someone elses style. Not to say it is not something I am willing to learn to do in order to not only improve my own writing, but possibly someone elses. I also think the idea of having to critique someones work before you post be essential, rather than touch and go. Just a couple of platitudes and a post does not count. I get that. But at this point I am rather confused.:confused:

[Etan Isar]

Confused about?

[cmcpress]

Whither the fine line on content?

Consistency of tone, dynamism of characterisation, pacing and construction of plot, the internal world logic or externally verifiable facts are all valid critiquing points - and are all comments on the construction of a piece. It does the author no good if he has perfect SPaG and yet the story itself is a mess.

What may not be a valid critiquing point is content as far as the following:

1. The intention of the author - critiquing should not be a rebuttal but a proof of how successful they have been in conveying their point of view*

2. Alternative ways of presenting story ideas or timelines when the author has a perfectly logical, satisfying, in-world execution

3. Trying to homogenize style - people should be free to experiment with language.

* to a certain degree - if the piece is a factual, or philosophic one then i think it should be valid to point out other further reading. Insight should be one of the tools in a writers arsenal.

[iambrad]

I've been reading this with some interest, and would just like to add my two cents. Grammar and spelling is VERY important. If that is a failing point then it needs to be addressed. A good review points out strengths as well as weaknesses.

Saying that one should only focus on the content, and not the structure is a bit like telling a building inspector "I know the foundations are all cracked to hell, but isn't the design wonderful?"

Maybe the design is fantastic, but if it all falls apart at the foundations then what's the point of bothering with critiquing what color paint was chosen?

[Pythonforger]

I was going to make a topic about this...

SPaG can become quite annoying, but it DOES help you grow as a writer. Let's take iambrad's example. Sure, the building inspector may lecture you a little about the foundations, but so what? The next time, fix it. And maybe then the inspector will look at your paint color.

However, reviews based SOLELY on SPaG... well, I hate them. I might as well have gotten my English Teacher to examine my story. My English Teacher, however, will neglect to point out that focusing on Grandma baking cookies suddenly during the epic Phantom VS Wraith battle is a complete change of atmosphere and tone, even if the cookies are important to the story, and thus she will not say,"Hey Python, look at this, change it!"

So who's going to tell me to change it? Why the reviewer! So that's why a reviewer must point out SPaG along with content.

Oh, and another thing. It's not good enough to point out bad things. This will just make the writer(if he's a newbie) say,"Great. Everyone here's a troll. I'm leaving." They should also point out that the rest of the Phantom VS Wraith battle is at an excellent pace and there's just enough description to get into the mood. Next time he'll continue to write excellent battles. And remember to tell him how to improve!

SPaG+Content+Praise+How can I improve=Good review

Thanks for taking the time to read this text wall.
-Pythonforger

[digitig]

However, reviews based SOLELY on SPaG... well, I hate them. I might as well have gotten my English Teacher to examine my story.
If the SPaG is so bad, you probably should have done ;)

My English Teacher, however, will neglect to point out that focusing on Grandma baking cookies suddenly during the epic Phantom VS Wraith battle is a complete change of atmosphere and tone, even if the cookies are important to the story, and thus she will not say,"Hey Python, look at this, change it!"
Then you need a better English teacher. I'm not sure we can help there.

[SRCroft]

I do believe that Grammar is relatively unimportant when next to Content. !

I couldn't agree more. Grammar is the set of rules that allow you to relay contextual meaning and inflection. There is no point to grammar if you have nothing important to say or what you are saying doesn't connect with anyone else.

I think it may boil down to how the person asks for a review and which section of the forum they choose to post. If a person asks me to read something and to let them know what I think, it will probably lead me to dissect grammar and comment on the content as a whole. If they ask me to explicate the literary value of their work, I will only focus on the content.

I think a lot of the responsibility is on the person seeking help.

Be clear on what advice you are seeking. Ask and narrow down the request.

This won't end the problem, but at least you know for sure when someone is ignoring your request and is feeding their own grammatical hubris.

[SRCroft]

I'm not trying to make people change, but it would be nice if some were more aware of how to review.

I posted earlier on the idea of reviewing and what might help the issue for both sides. In your experience, when you ask for a review, do you clarify the request? I am not saying you don't already do this, I am honestly curious if people are ignoring your real question.

Beyond picking the right area in the forum to post, I believe that the person who posts or requests something, should be clear and concise.

e.g. I would like someone's perspective and a review on my work and let me know what you think of the theme or the character development of the piece.

or

e.g. I am happy with my story, but I would like some grammatical or organizational help. Could someone please look this over?

Like I said in my other post, some people will probably still ignore the specificity of the request, but at least you'll know it for sure.

In many posts that I have seen people post a blurb and ask if people could let them know what they think. If people think about grammar a lot, that's where they will naturally head.

That aside, if someone does ask for a content review and it looks like a dictionary has been mauled by a 2-ton bear, they probably should be politely corrected. But, since their request is about content, the grammar correction should be short, (e.g., There seem to be a lot of grammar mistakes that make it hard to read and understand. Let me know if you want help with that.), and then move onto the content review.

[hiddennovelist]

The problem with the idea of requesting a review on something specific about a piece, though, is that often the requested focus is not what the writer needs to work on. If someone asks me to critique a piece and focus on how well their plot flows, for example, and when I read it I discover that while their plot is fine, their grammar, spelling, etc is atrocious, I'm not just going to say "hey, the plot was great. You could tweak it a little bit here and here, but otherwise it's spot-on." I'm going to point out the SPaG mistakes as well, because that's where they need to improve.

[Alterra]

I find that most people who are new to reviewing tend to want to play "politics". They might start with "I'm not the expert but..." and give a half-effort dab in one direction. They may be too afraid of offering a wrong opinion that they stick to the easiest mistakes.

A new reviewer should view the act of reviewing as a mimicry of reading. Where the reader may opt to read or not, the reviewer must read. The reviewer must then ask himself what ruins the experience and constructively what hooked him in. If they can find little positive then they must in NO WAY assume that it was the writing alone. This require further analysis.

Those are some things that come to mind and I am not stating this is "the method".