Critiquing checklist for dummies

[ralphr81]

Taken from: http://suite101.com/article/checklist-for-critiquing-fiction-a144988

Opening Line and Title – Did they grab the reader? How did they fit with the whole story? Were they attention grabbing?

Conflict – is their enough conflict (external and internal) to move the story on? Was the conflict clear? Was the conflict resolved or replaced by the end of the story?

Plot– Did the story flow well. Was the plot clear and believable? Did the story start in the right place?

Setting – Was there enough or too much description? Did the descriptions help to set the tone for the story? Were they consistent and accurate of the time/place?

Characterisation – Did the characters appear real? Could the reader empathise or dislike them? Were the characters accurate and consistent? Did the main character undergo some change during the story? Were there too many too little characters?

Dialogue – Was the dialogue believable, understandable? Was there enough dialogue to move the story on? Could you ‘hear’ the dialogue? Does each character have a unique voice?

Point of View – Was it consistent? Were there enough/too many? If the POV changed, would the reader be able to follow?

Show and Tell – Was there a good balance of show and tell? Was there enough detailed description where needed?

Grammar and Spelling – Were there many errors or common mistakes? Was there an overuse of any particular grammar symbol e.g. exclamation marks? Were there any clichés? Were these appropriate or overused?

[Calidore]

That's a good set of guidelines. The following two paragraphs are important also, so let's include them:

Critique Feedback

The checklist above provides a loose framework from which feedback can be developed. For the receiving writer it is important that an honest appraisal is provided in a professional manner. Critique partners should therefore describe or highlight scenes, paragraphs they liked and why as well as pointing out things that don’t work so well. The feedback should be clear and precise and constructive rather than critical. It is always easier to point out what is wrong, with a bit of thought; suggestions for change can be helpful.

Writers are unable to evaluate their own work with enough objectivity and distance. Good feedback can add so much value to a manuscript, helping the writer to polish his work to a standard, which will move it from the slush pile to the top of the editor’s desk.

[ralphr81]

I have yet to see you criticize a story using the above framework. All I'm reading is personal opinions. That, in my opinion, is not constructive criticism. A forum is considered a group, so in order to limit personal opinions a set framework needs to be established.

[cafolini]

This is too complicated for dummies. It can only discourage a real dummy.

[Jack of Hearts]

Blood offering. Post a story. Let's see if you can pony up something other than bad crit and unpleasantness.






J

[MANICHAEAN]

Yeah. Bring it on man.

[ralphr81]

I can honestly tell you that I'm not a creative writer. I'm a good reader though. How am I offering bad crit? All I see is opinions, no actual criticism. I understand providing your own personal opinion after you've critiqued the story, but to offer your opinion without actually evaluating the story on its own is just fanboyism to me. It doesn't help anybody at all.

[Steven Hunley]

Yeah. Bring it on man.


Oh yes, by all means. The proof is in the putting, or is it pudding? Either way I guess. No story, so no crying about bad critiques unless it's about your own story, then you have a sincere reason to sing the blues and protest. Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much!

Am I getting cruel? No, but I am getting funny. Any Yankee misquoting Shakespeare is funny.

Seriously though, it's not that you're offering bad critiques, but rather that you're saying there are no real critiques offered. At first I couldn't figure out why, but then quickly realized your name wasn't familiar, and it turned out it was because you were new. Hang around a bit longer and read a few more responses, you'll see many more what you would call 'serious' meaningful critiques. Some are quite extensive. Look deeper or watch longer and they'll turn up.

[Jack of Hearts]

Oh, if only a certain more worthy poster were still around to have this discussion with you. Jack of Hearts, not being equal to the task, must abdicate.

And, since Mr. Hunley decided to come in, why not tack something nice on to the end of this reply:

Crit is neither good nor bad, but thinking makes it so.







J

[ralphr81]

Crit can help if you're being objective. Not so much if you're looking at the story from a subjective point of view. Any good critic can tell you that.

[Jack of Hearts]

And you are that good critic, and you have. Nicely done.






J

[ralphr81]

I'm not saying I'm a good critic. But I try to evaluate the story without my personal feelings getting in the way. You can be a fan of a certain genre, but if you compare every story that is written to stories that came before it, that to me isn't helping anyone. If you think so, then I feel sorry for you.

[Jack of Hearts]

And your pity moves this poster all the world.

What's unfortunate is that, while you seem sincere, the manner in which you've chosen to express yourself on the boards has been pretty toxic so far. And this is relevant. Reading and critiquing, that's the interplay of your mind with that of the writer's/artist's/creator's. Maybe critiquing 101, or 'Critiquing for Dummies,' should first and foremost be the realization of that. When you express yourself, you are in fact presenting your mind outwardly. We make inferences from that, trust. There was a post where you talked about Hawkman having no credibility to your eyes based on a way in which he expressed himself. How much credibility do you feel you have, how much weight could your critique/mind possibly have to us, when you arrive on a board and presume to tell people of various backgrounds, experiences and skill levels how to function at something they've already been doing sans your intervention?

This entire post, though certainly containing a given undertone, should not be read as a 'telling off' or a 'setting straight.' This was an act of patience and love. This was a mercy to you.





J

[ralphr81]

And your pity moves this poster all the world.

What's unfortunate is that, while you seem sincere, the manner in which you've chosen to express yourself on the boards has been pretty toxic so far. And this is relevant. Reading and critiquing, that's the interplay of your mind with that of the writer's/artist's/creator's. Maybe critiquing 101, or 'Critiquing for Dummies,' should first and foremost be the realization of that. When you express yourself, you are in fact presenting your mind outwardly. We make inferences from that, trust. There was a post where you talked about Hawkman having no credibility to your eyes based on a way in which he expressed himself. How much credibility do you feel you have, how much weight could your critique/mind possibly have to us, when you arrive on a board and presume to tell people of various backgrounds, experiences and skill levels how to function at something they've already been doing sans your intervention?

This entire post, though certainly containing a given undertone, should not be read as a 'telling off' or a 'setting straight.' This was an act of patience and love. This was a mercy to you.




J


This is an example of a good critique in your eyes?

Originally posted by Hawkman: Hmmm. I actually had to try and read this a couple of times. I started reading the first time and thought: Ark ship - cliche; fighting over rationed water - cliche; Fisheads - straight out of a Dr Who episode; second generation officer class on board ship - Cliche. At the first attempt I gave up just after he went and had a cup of tea with his mum! At this point I skimmed to the end and thought Oh Dear, Big Cliche!

If there's one thing I've learned in life, it's that when someone points out a major kink in something, those who were comfortable with the way it originally was will automatically label that person as toxic. The ultimate example of a witch hunt.

[tailor STATELY]

Some of my favorite prose:

KJV Mathew 7:

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

Welcome to Litnet.

Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY

[ralphr81]

Some of my favorite prose:

KJV Mathew 7:

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

Welcome to Litnet.

Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY

I don't see how any of that is relevant to this discussion.

[Jack of Hearts]

Oh? But didn't you say you were a good reader? Maybe go back over the responses in this thread slowly and underline. It seems you missed some central points.

Anyways, this poster will leave you to it, then. Enjoy your popularity and your productive/rewarding work.







J

[ralphr81]

Even if I had work I wouldn't post in on here. I see some good stories on this forum but not enough criticism. The forum thread should be renamed to "Short Story Sharing For Opinions Only."

[AuntShecky]

Even if I had work I wouldn't post in on here. I see some good stories on this forum but not enough criticism. The forum thread should be renamed to "Short Story Sharing For Opinions Only."

I'm not a Moderator, but have you read the Forum Rules? The rules clearly state that posting a short story comes with the understanding that others may offer their opinions on it. Some LitNutters are grateful to receive any kind of feedback at all, not necessarily praise.

[ralphr81]

I'm not a Moderator, but have you read the Forum Rules? The rules clearly state that posting a short story comes with the understanding that others may offer their opinions on it. Some LitNutters are grateful to receive any kind of feedback at all, not necessarily praise.

OK, so it is an opinion forum then. That's all I wanted to know. Thanks and good luck.

[MANICHAEAN]

You really are an absolute darling.
Have not seen such spirited effusions since Wolf Larsen trod the boards.

[Calidore]

If there's one thing I've learned in life, it's that when someone points out a major kink in something, those who were comfortable with the way it originally was will automatically label that person as toxic. The ultimate example of a witch hunt.

As when we pointed out major kinks in the story? Pot, meet kettle.

Though I do think "toxic" is harsh. Your arguments have frequently depended on completely ignoring reality and inventing your own, but you've never stooped to the level of personal abuse or threats.

[Scheherazade]

Taken from: http://suite101.com/article/checklist-for-critiquing-fiction-a144988

Opening Line and Title – Did they grab the reader? How did they fit with the whole story? Were they attention grabbing?

Conflict – is their enough conflict (external and internal) to move the story on? Was the conflict clear? Was the conflict resolved or replaced by the end of the story?

Plot– Did the story flow well. Was the plot clear and believable? Did the story start in the right place?

Setting – Was there enough or too much description? Did the descriptions help to set the tone for the story? Were they consistent and accurate of the time/place?

Characterisation – Did the characters appear real? Could the reader empathise or dislike them? Were the characters accurate and consistent? Did the main character undergo some change during the story? Were there too many too little characters?

Dialogue – Was the dialogue believable, understandable? Was there enough dialogue to move the story on? Could you ‘hear’ the dialogue? Does each character have a unique voice?

Point of View – Was it consistent? Were there enough/too many? If the POV changed, would the reader be able to follow?

Show and Tell – Was there a good balance of show and tell? Was there enough detailed description where needed?

Grammar and Spelling – Were there many errors or common mistakes? Was there an overuse of any particular grammar symbol e.g. exclamation marks? Were there any clichés? Were these appropriate or overused?Thank you for this helpful post, Ralph.

However, since the rest of this thread has dissolved into a mash of personal innuendos and deprecated comments, this thread will now be closed.