I'm right there with you(I'm 15). I see all these big critques, and I want to try to make something very professional like but I'm afraid I'll just end up making myself look stupid. Probably because I been on other forums where people like to bash you hard for little mistakes.
Wow, won't this thread ever die! If some of you put even half the effort into actually writing a critique, as you do debating if you are good enough to write a one, then you'd be expert at it by now. Regardless of your age.
Us Teen writers need to stick together! I think it all comes down to experience. But either way, we can still say what we like and dislike!
Relevant threads continue a discussion. It's a good thing. I don't think age is a barrier, but is often an indicator. I don't mean that to be rude, it's just a reality. More experience with the language and interacting and reading, etc, will lead to better reviewing, and older people have simply had more opportunity. It's like when I started college at the ancient age of 27. I realized had I been 18, I would have been lost in most of my classes. But just from sheer aspect of life experience and exposure to general knowledge, lower division classes were a cake walk, because I was often not learning new things, just reinforcing things I'd learned in the course of living life. Nobody should be discouraged by their age, nor hide it. I think it's acceptable and even preferable to mention your age and/or experience, as long as it's coming from a place of humility. Mentioning one is young and doesn't have a lot of experience, but hopes to learn from their own review and the writer's work, and hopes the writer might learn something too, and I don't think anyone will have any problems.
Quote: Originally Posted by Youniquee I'm only 14..[15 really soon] I just don't feel good enough to go and critic other people's when I can't even write half as good xD What if I make a point that's just overly stupid? what do you think? Don't worry about it, I'll be 15 in about two months, I feel as if I cant Critique Worth a crap. lol, And my work isn't much better but the difference is you have to practice in order to get better, First off i'd suggest reviewing stuff you already know Or should know at least what and how to do such as grammar and spelling, then you'll begin to catch on to other things, Good luck and if you have any questions or want to talk feel free to message me.
A certain level of maturity does come along with giving criticism (as some people are too immature to handle criticism) in my opinion, although its merely just your own experienced opinion/suggestions. People really shouldn't be judged on their criticism just as they shouldn't be judged based on their works.
I agree that people should not be discouraged by their age, but I disagree that it's 'preferable' to mention your age for two reasons, Firstly I have seen people in forums be condescending and rude to anyone who admitted being younger then them, And secondly at age 16 I had read more [adult] books as many adults Finally I wish to point out that a 17 year old writes something for the first time and a 26 year old who writes something for the first time have the same amount of writing experience [None].
I agree, there are sometimes jerks out there. But I'd never advice making decisions based on extremes. And trust me, people aren't just condescending in response to one's age. Such people will be condescending either way, usually, regardless of mentioning age or not. In most circumstances, though, giving your age and/or experience will let someone better understand your perspective and where you're coming from, which will lesson misscommunication and I believe lesson negative responses, as most (not all, but most) people will then understand and appreciate that perspective instead of just getting pissed off they didn't get professional editing from someone who may not have the experience to offer that level of a response.
I see your point on experience, I however think that a review should stand on it's own, [I.E. When I see a review I don't care who's writing it, I only care about the content] About age I don't see age as an important factor, only maturity level of the person and that can be judged by the way they act/what they post [in my experience]
I wouldn't worry about putting something stupid, just because you don't have experance in critiquing others work. By doing that you will learn just as much as they will. Age doesn't make the difference
It depends on the story. If you are writing about some one that is a teenager in today's day and age (not the 70s or 80s) then age might hurt you. I am 39 and would not presume to say that some one who is 17 is no worse than me at critiquing stories written for that audience. As I say to every one, keep an open mind to your audience.
I agree with this statement immensely. If everyone has this attitude, then age will not be an issue, nor will gender, race, sexual preference, or anything else for that matter. I don't believe that being young makes you a lesser critic, it just makes you a younger critic.
i think so :/ i feel like i have nothing really new/relvant to say compared to the older/more educated reviewers here
If someone reads a story mine they have something useful to tell me, even if it's just 'I liked/didn't like it'
Oh, honey...! I asked myself this when I started entering forums and writing communities, and I actually asked a published writer about this after trying to critique some of his writing. And he claimed some of his best feedback actually came from the unpublished ones simply because they were still so "out of it" that they wold notice completely different things than an experienced writer Well, that's what he told me at least. Besides, critique does not necessarily have to point out what is bad, it can also point out what is good. Telling someone what you like about a particular piece of writing might change how the writer look at that particular part of his/her writing. Something I wrote stuck to a friends brain and she flipped when I sent her the new edited version where that particular part had been altered Of all the things I could expect her to remember, that definitely wasn't one of them! So I don't think you should use your age against you, or let someone else use it against you for that matter
There's age, and then there's experience. While I can't possibly compare the two (I refuse to believe age brings experience- only actions and their results do), the age of the critic may influence what the public sees of him/her, but overall the age difference and reading level will influence the review itself. (I can't possibly see someone 40 years old going through a children's book, taking notes on basically everything, and then writing a review that will make it sell.) I personally believe that the critic should be at the most a decade older than the intended audience (10 years, maybe), but that's just an opinion.
So can we agree that Age and Exsprince do not equal the same thing? one can have age buit have no exsprince with being a critic then what? I'd imagein if you take away natural talent it would be the same as if a teen did it the only time when age will afect is A. when you cant speak yet 0-3 or so B when your not in "tune" with said age group a 40 year old thinks "Teens like cute poneeys and vive versa C there are alwasy exceptions to both
I loveee ponieess, they are so funny. [sorry the opportunity arisen and I couldn't resist the temptation] Not talking to wolfi: Since the thread has gone on for 8 pages. I don't have much to say. However, I do think age plays a part in it. All though there is age and experience. I know for a fact people do judge upon age. You can say they don't or not everyone. And sure there are exceptions to the rule. However, for most people 14 or 15 is a kid. I know at that age people still treated me like a child even though I felt I wasn't. People won't take young critics seriously. So yes, sometimes age does play a part in the critique.
I swear if a teenager had as much respect as a collage graduate, I'd already be reviewing for the New York Times. I mean, seriously, getting paid to read and write about it? One of my dream jobs there.
I think it's about your level of professionalism and maturity that makes one credible, not age. If I'm in my 20s but write a rambling, unclear review full of typos, spelling atrocities and words like "lolz," but my 10-year-old cousin can write with minimal typos, decent composure and organized thoughts, she'll look way more credible than me. And rightly so.
Just a fair warning: there are people out there who WILL judge you based on your age before they even look at whatever you wrote. That's not fair, but it's a fact of life. For example: In 7th grade, I took a test to get into a college writing class. I was ranked among the top 5% of technical English writers in my state at college entry level. When I was a sophomore in high school, I took another test and skipped over three advanced college English classes. I always use that example, not to be selfish, but because it's ample proof that children aren't as . . . well, childish as many people think (and because it's the only good example I know of). I only passed those tests because I had more experience in it than most people my age. As has been said many times, it's not age that determines one's ability, but experience. Still, as people have already said, young writers are taken about as seriously as checkout aisle tabloids. The only difference is that young writers can actually be good.
