Posted: Feb 26, 08 8:48am
The other day, I was writing an e-mail to someone in a series of discussions we were having about what to look for when writing or critiquing. I wrote these off the top of my head. The list is not complete but it seemed to have enough ideas that I wanted to share it with others who might find it valuable. It is an addendum to the material that Kat posted the other day about critiquing.
Writing and critiquing are two sides of the same coin. Whatever rules you apply to writing, apply also to critiquing writing or editing and polishing your own work.
I wrote it in the form of questions because that is the way I think. When I sit down to compose a piece of writing, I write a rough draft from beginning to end, and before I do anything else, I check it for spelling, grammar and punctuation errors. That is automatic but it is only a first step in preparing the work before anyone else will see it. I will leave tags where I find other issues I want to look at so I can return to them.
I use the same criteria when critiquing and since the two tasks - writing and critiquing - are the basis for this forum, I decided to cut and paste it. They are not ordered by importance. They came out the way you see them.
* How does the writer use, not abuse, adjectives and adverbs?
* Does the writing have "picket fence" adjectives making every sentence look like a freight train?
* Does the writer structure sentences in different ways and in different lengths so that the reader will not get into a rhythm that tells him what comes next before he reads it?
* Does the writer use adverbs in tags, he said, intimidatingly?
* Does the writer know a verb other than tenses and forms of the verb "to be?" Can he use verbs instead of adverbs to give the story movement and feeling?
* Does the writer understand that a pronoun needs a previous noun to define it? Or, in the case of a mystery, "he" or "she" has to be so interesting that you forget that the character has no name. I wrote a novel with an unknown killer and couldn't even use he or she because even the gender was unknown to the reader! I solved it by writing the killer sequences in a passive voice. Like they say at the beer factory: Schmidt's happens! There is always a satisfactory way to handle anything.
* How does the writer take the reader into consideration in the form, style and facts presented? For instance, does he or she define arcane terms? Does he or she make references to songs that "everyone should know," but I don't? For instance, I love to use Chet Baker's music as a backdrop in stories but I would guess that less than 5% of people have any idea who he was or how the term "Let's Get Lost" played into the theme of his life. So, I explain it briefly. I wouldn't use it in a 1000 word story because to have to explain it is not a worthwhile use of the reader's time in such a short story.
* Does the writer understand the difference between dialogue and conversation? How does he or she display this understanding?
* Does the writer allow the character to determine the dialogue or does his or her own censor forbid the characters to use certain expressions? You can always choose not to write about foul people if you don't like foul expressions, language and thoughts.
* Is there a clear plot line and is it resolved or at least acknowledged by the writer?
* Does the writer know that he or she needs to "make up" his or her own cliches and not use the tried and true ones (now there's a cliche!) others have beaten to death (another one)? Two cliches in one sentence should be a death knell (there is my third cliche for this paragraph).
* Is there is sense of emotion in the work? Does the writer sound excited about the story? If not, I won't be either.
* Does the writer take risks with his character development and dialogue or settle for the safe?
* Is the character obviously the reader and his almost ex-wife to the degree that you can see the blood on the page or has he fictionalized them to the point where you cannot establish any identity in the real world?
* If a gun is introduced in act one - scene one, is it fired before the final curtain?
* At the end, as the reader, do you want more? Are the reasons you want more because of the lack of expositional writing or because of the depth of writing and your desire to see these characters perform a few more tricks?
* Are there any obvious "misteaks" in the setting? I once read a published detective novel set in Philadelphia where the action was set on "Fourteenth Street." There is no Fourteenth Street in Philadelphia. It is called Broad Street. There is also no First Street. It is Front Street. Many locales have quirks like that and you have to get them right or choose someplace fictional that has only your imagined quirks. We can't criticize Emerald City because none of us has ever been there - at least not without LSD! Make a knowledge error like that and I put the work down and don't pick it up again.
* Are there statements of the writer's religion, politics or beliefs that have nothing to do with the characters other than to use them as "mouthpieces" for the writer's shibboleths?
* Is the ending consistent with the character's abilities or is it Deus Ex Machina?
* As a reading writer, are you able to say, "I wish I'd written that!"
* Will you remember the characters in this work tomorrow morning?
* Did you get the feeling that the writer spent hours polishing before he submitted it? Are there passages no one - not even a Pulitzer Prize winning writer - could have pulled out of his butt on a first draft?
* Finally, would you recommend this story to your best friend if he or she had twenty minutes of sight left and this would be the last thing he or she would ever be able to read?
