dear writers and artists and anyone who contributes to fandom

[tellytubby101]

What do you want in a review/critique?

I'm asking you guys because I want to know. There seems to be some discrepancy in how people think feedback should be delivered.

When it comes to reviewing, I'm generally enthusiastic, will point out two or three things I liked and will throw in a good keysmash when the situation asks for it. Icons are normally changed to appropriate .gifs of love and joy. I love using a ton of colourful adjectives to descibe how I felt and reacted to the fic/art/fanmix/etc. When I point out possible errors, I do so kindly and normally at the end of a nice review.

But reviewing doesn't seem to generate issues - critiquing does. Critiquing, I feel, is different to reviewing in that - the person recieving it asked for it to be a bit more in-depth. Commonly seen in beta work or authors playing with a new genre/style/fandom. 

Personally, I try work by the Critter Method when delivering critiques. To summarise for those too lazy to read the whole thing (though I highly recommend it, since the article includes excellent examples and is more in-depth than I will be): 

• make it less a generalisation (as in we think) and more personal (your views are your own, no one else's: I think, I feel, etc.)
• make it sound like an opinion rather than a rule
  • avoiding definites like "you have to" or "you must" and substituting "I feel as though" or "perhaps you might", etc.
• don't try to persuade, just suggest it to them and let the author/artist/etc. ultimately decide
• avoid ALL CAPS and exclaimations!!1! and text speak
• critique the story, not the person - refrain from insulting them

I also have two other things I try to do not included in the Critter Method:
 

• no swearing when correcting/offering suggestions because I think it makes things potentionally too personal/offensive
  • of course, swearing in the sense of positive enthusiasm (fucking awesome shit, man) is okay
• try to praise the writing every now and then; it doesn't need to be a block of red pen marks

How much I stick to these rules depends on how well I know the person I'm working with. For example, this RL person's trilogy I'm helping critique is also sprinkled with lewd jokes here and there when the writing presents innuendo fuel. (Don't worry, the author loves them. ;D)

Anyway, what about you - what kind of things do you like seeing in feedback? Things like certain sections being quoted back at you, or perhaps a comment on characterisation/world-building/etc.? Artists, do you mind getting comments regarding proportion or colour schemes? Finally, what do you HATE in feedback?

COME AT ME, BRO; I WANT DETAILS. :DDD

Comments

[takmarierah.livejournal.com]

Y'know mostly what I don't like in feedback is when a critiquer gets caught up in their own very personal opinions - this has really only ever happened in RL but I've had other students write things like "you shouldn't use these words because I don't know what they mean", "I like your character but he's obviously not a scientist because he talks like a normal person," and "I don't like that she wanders around topless in her apartment (because I'm a prude)."

Then, as you said, I love when a critiquer picks out certain passages that they like, even if it's just to underline a sentence and put a check mark next to it, because often it'll be a sentence I put a lot of effort into. I like when they write down what their own reactions and thought-processes are because at this point I'm mostly beyond needing language correction and more on tone, and how the reader experiences the writing. I don't mind suggestions on better ways to organize sentences, although I have experienced that to an extreme in a poetry class where one student went through every poem and basically re-wrote it using the sentence structure he would.

In art, well, complimenting specifics is the best way to go, and in critiques I usually try to say something along the lines of "I really like how you did x, but the shadows of your y makes it look a little flat." Hearing something like "it's really good" is honestly a bit discouraging (and what most non-artists will say) because that can often be code for "I don't really like it" and can't you find one thing to compliment to tell me you didn't just glance at it?

Otherwise... I basically agree with what you put up there. It's sound advice, and seems like it should be self-explanatory (even if it often isn't).

[irisbleufic.livejournal.com]

Above all, I want complete honesty.

[fantomeq.livejournal.com]

It sounds like you're putting a lot of thought into it and doing a great job, but I think most people don't like to receive critiques unless the person has power over then. When I ran my ezine, most people took the criticism well, but every once in a while, someone would get very upset, when essentially, I was acting as their boss. Basically, some people cannot take criticism. I admit, I am one of them. It has to be delivered gently and then simmer overnight before it is received.

I think it needs a good balance of compliments to criticisms, but sometimes it's really hard to find something to compliment. I'm finding more and more that I don't review fanfiction because I can't get past reading the first couple pages. It's usually the schmoopy stuff that throws me off. The first time I see a schmoopy term of endearment among two men, I'm gone.

[gryvon.livejournal.com]

With critiques, mostly I just want something in depth, beyond the usual spelling/grammar corrections. I like to know what worked well and what bombed, what parts feel slow or flat or awkward, where things need expanded or condensed. A critiquer should be looking for plot holes, for inconsistencies, for dropped storylines. I'm more interested in their thoughts on how the story works as a whole than individual line by line corrections (though those are good/necessary too).

[stupid-drawings.livejournal.com]

The only feedback that annoys me are the ones that basically just sound like they think I am mean for what I wrote happening to a character. For a made up thing happening to a fictional character... But I went to art school, any comment I could possibly get I've already had worse and to my face.

[unjaundiced.livejournal.com]

I think you already know my basic review/critique process.
Step 1: Public flailing and general embarrassment of writer/artist/etc. + possible silly commentary
Step 2: Private in-depth dissection of story, plot, and characterization and possible obnoxious rambling.

Grammar edit suggestions may be available for both. (At a low low price!)

I think it's hard to be a conscientious and really thoughtful reviewer. What you say tends to point out what you noticed the most and what made you think the most and it will generally become apparent as you go on. Most people find it easier to be soft-commenters and say generally nice things and others seem to be overly critical or to take certain bits waaaaaay out of context or place their own restrictions around it so it skews the overall intent of the piece you have presented... AND THEN THEY TELL YOU ABOUT HOW YOU MESSED WITH THEIR HEAD AND THEY DIDN'T LIKE IT AND YOU SHOULD FIX IT

>.> Sorry, I digress.

But reviews and critiques, like conversations and real relationship, should be tempered with courtesy and kindness as well as insightfulness. Critiques can only be suggestions, not fascist demands and whether they are taken or not is up to the creator, not the viewer. The experience is being molded for you. Go on the journey or get off the bus.

Reviews likewise should be tempered. I know they should be honest reactions to an experience, but usually the feelings will mellow or change if you let them rest a bit and you'd have something better to say a day later rather than 5 minutes later. If you have something horrid or angry to say, hold it in and move on. Life is full of stuff we don't like. We can't go around burning down clothing stores full of fashion we don't like, right? So flames need to be kept down as well.

And that is my semi-ramble.... >.> Have fun.