Community Information and Stationery Armoury

[active_apathy]

Observation of the day: Fashioning a chain from paperclips is an essential skill, and should be taught in schools in case it's ever essential to find an escape route from invading zombies using only stationery. This is plain and simple fact.

On the other hand, making chainmail from paperclips is recommended in exactly the same way as using a mouse as a planishing stake, or corrugated cardboard and staples as substitutes for plate lamés and rivets: ie, not. It's certainly possible, but the time and effort mean that by the time you had cardboard tassets or paperclip haubergeon, you'd have been eaten.

On the plus side, I now have a small piece of 4-to-1 paperclipmail where previously I had thirty fifty-two sixty-six paperclips of expired usefulness, which is probably proof against papercuts or something. Yay. Mercifully, the paperclip box is empty now.



And now for something far more useful: community info! In bold, so that it's easy to see.

I've been starting to kind of plot out the finished community info for critique_club, which (so far) mostly means making some notes and a couple of lists. In the interests of getting things right fairly quickly, what kind of things do you consider useful when someone comments on writing?

I'm especially interested in what those of you who write things other than prose fiction have to say, but I'll field suggestions from everyone.



Also, because I've just thought of it, I still need a tag for when I post ridiculous and/or nonsensical things. So!
[Poll #1087213]

Comments

[goblinpaladin.livejournal.com]

I write essays an incoherent garbled academia, so I count, right?

Aside from the obvious spelling and grammar checks:

-Does it flow? Does each paragraph link together, does each paragraph contain the correct information... i.e, we don't have one paragraph rambling over several points, or one point split into several paragraphs. This applies to fiction as well, obviously.

-How does each section work? Does the introduction introduce, does the conclusion wrap up? Etc. (This is something I am especially worried about in my creative writing, actually.) For example, check out "Creatures of Mercy," which is an unbalanced story. The first half is fine, but the second half lacks...something to help keep the spin between the two perspectives working.

In terms of how I prefer my critiques, I like 'em detailed. In-depth analysis of things, both sentence-by-sentence and overall sweeping statements. Brief notes on how the thing works 'overall' are still helpful, but when I critique, I critique. I've been informed by hobbyist Warhammer modifyers over at Hammer and Anvil that my in-depth criticism is both terrifying and awesome.

Hope that gives you some ideas.

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

It does, and it ticks the little tickyboxes next to some of mine.

And, yes: garbled academia counts too, though I might suggest ungarbling.

Also, I'm going to vote awesome, despite having not seen it yet. Or you could terrify me if you'd like to. :)

[goblinpaladin.livejournal.com]

Well, I intend to try and write some ungarbled academia and clear personal posts over the coming summer, so we'll see how we go there. I've also got a few choice ranty ones, for good fun and high times.

I don't have time to do criticism at the moment, but I've bookmarked that stowy in my 'Blog This' pile, and will come back to it for you, okay?

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

Indeed. And, if nothing else, it should be good practice (and likely input) for writing more ungarbled academia.

And, shiny. It's one I happen to have posted away from this journal, so I've even got some other people's vaguely-terrifying to compare it against.

[goblinpaladin.livejournal.com]

Yay practice!

I'm happy to critique. From what I've seen of your penmanship before, though, I'm not sure how terrifying I'll be.

Glug. Sleepy now.

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

Mm, perhaps, though you may be being altogether too kind. There's bits and pieces I'm less than happy about.

Sleepy. Yes. But, I must tabulate results of original research. Stupid original research. Fire pretty?

[one-bullet-left.livejournal.com]

I am very much interested in your comm, if you don't mind me joining. As for critiques... friends don't let friends go out in public with typos caught between their teeth. Pretty much anything that looks like a mistake, a like brought to my attention.

Also, if a critic figures something Just Doesn't Work, I want to know about that, too. I may have had doubts about putting it in in the first place, and it's useful to have those doubts confirmed (or denied). I also like to know what DID work especially well... but that could just be my ego talking.

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

I don't mind at all, unless being happy about it counts as 'minding'. :)

Ooh, yes. I'd missed typos and other proofing somehow. *scribbles*

And, probably not. Good things are worth mentioning - something like 'see that thing you did there? Brilliant. Do more of that!' is eminently useful for doing Good Things™.

[ethernight.livejournal.com]

Some off-the-top-of-my-head ideas:

Submissions should be behind a cut

General be nice. That doesn't mean don't say negative things, just don't be an ass about it. I think this community will only work if people feel safe about posting there, which is a hard thing to do in a room full of critics.

What kinds of things can be submitted for critique? For example, if I am writing a letter to my landlord that needs to come off as professional, does this qualify?

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

Edit feature, yay. The start of that was:

'Be civil' will definitely be in, or something. (If someone says stop or goes limp, the critique stops? ...or not quite.)

I'm not sure about letters, or similar things. Fiction, essays, poetry, non-fictiony stuff, excerpts of bigger things maybe, and probably other kinds of writings that I haven't thought of. I'm not sure I'm quite against it; there's not much difference between that and proofing or checking other kinds of writing, but we'd also not want people who go 'I'm posting my letter! And when I get that done, I have all I need! Why should I do anything for other people?'

...unless posting access is only given to people who've critiqued in accordance with all relevant guidelines. Hmm.

And yes. Oh, yes. I was thinking something like links and/or posting copies in the comm, with limits - something like a cut based on word count, maybe around 50, or some kind of 'definitely-cut-if-there's-more-than-100-words, cut-after-about-50-words, don't-be-stupid-about-word-counts'.

Actually, I'll reply to myself in a moment with 100 words of lorem ipsum I prepared earlier.

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.

Integer in libero non massa iaculis suscipit. Aliquam sed lorem posuere lectus nonummy vulputate. Duis porttitor fringilla lorem. Donec interdum ipsum adipiscing ligula. Mauris enim est, luctus quis, suscipit sit amet, semper ac, diam.

Phasellus varius, metus ullamcorper eleifend consectetuer, massa pede _{50 words here} rutrum dolor, eu suscipit mi diam sagittis odio. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae;

Sed nec eros. Proin ultricies. Nam eget massa. Pellentesque non sem vitae arcu ultrices nonummy. Aenean sagittis. Donec in massa. Morbi sapien. Mauris feugiat adipiscing quam. In nisi purus.

[goblinpaladin.livejournal.com]

I have a Latin test tomorrow and the fact that I couldn't read a word of that terrifies me. Argh.

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

The fact that it's not proper Latin should, I think, comfort you somewhat.

[goblinpaladin.livejournal.com]

Oh, I could tell that. But it looked right, and that gave me a brainspasm.

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

Its entire job is to look right. :)

[deepfishy.livejournal.com]

*sips tea*
*reads Community Rules (Concise Edition)*
*giggles*
*chokes*

I may be a roving critter, since I don't always have something ready for crit, but I believe firmly in the adage that you learn more from giving crit (ie, learning to think critically) than receiving it. I try to give both line-level and overall critique, time permitting. Tyops and malaprops included. My patience with cliches and tired tropes is not what it used to be.

Umm...things I've learned from workshops and crit circles:

• Address the writing, not the writer. Helps reduce the ego-hurt when you're picking the thing to pieces.
  
  
• If something's really working for you (a sentence, a plot twist, characterisation, whatever), mention it. How else will the writer know?
  
  
• Don't just say "none of this works, the story sucks". Explain why. Something may be salvageable.
  
  
• Critters disagree. That's half the fun, and that's where you use your writer judgement. (But if everyone agrees on a point, maybe they're right).
  
  
• Sometimes (*gasp*) critters are wrong. They won't get it, or their personal quirks kick in (for good or bad). Again, use writer judgement, and don't hide behind "they Just Don't Understand" as an excuse to dismiss a painful crit.
  
  
• The appropriate response to a crit you don't agree with is "thank you for taking the time to crit this" and silence, not flying into a rant or arguing.
  
  
• If you, the author, are not clear on a point, ask.
  
  
• Sometimes it's helpful to know what the crit-ee is particularly concerned about. (I don't know whether it's best to know this before or after the first reading. After, probably.)
  
  
• Snippets are all very well, but it's hard to judge a story without the complete plot arc.
  
  
• I guess it all comes down to honne and tatemae - a critique needs honesty, not gentle lies. That honesty must be polite - we are not in the business of cruelty.
  
  
• Above all, remember that a critique is to help the writer get better at their craft. That's your goal as a critiquer, and your position in asking for critique.

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

analise is the mind behind the concise rules, but they're a good summary of how things should be.

And, yes: I do rather agree with that, which is secretly the other half of the reason behind the comm.

Now, the listydotpointthingies, in order for once:

• Yes. Oh, yes. I'd also hope that making people write crit gets them into a better place for accepting it. And I do mean hope.


• Yes. Emphatically! Emphatically yes, not emphatically tell, though emphatically telling is good for very good things and... I stop now.


• *nodnod* Specifics are important all over.


• Indeed! Or, possibly, when it's useful to get an idea of what kind of audience particular critters are closest to.


• Yes, and...


• yes. It is absolutely essential that critters and crittees be civil. That said, the phrase "interrogating the text from the wrong perspective" will be a bannable offence.


• Ooh. I'd overlooked that, probably because it seems obvious to me.


• Mm, possibly. Or even follow-up with critters of "and what did you think about _______?"


• Mm, yes.


• Indeed. See also: hope, above.


• Rule 4. :D

[deepfishy.livejournal.com]

Indeed! Or, possibly, when it's useful to get an idea of what kind of audience particular critters are closest to.

This is true. Some people just aren't your audience, because they only like zombie stories, or hate the hardboiled/noir narrative voice, or what have you. They can still give useful critique, mind, but they may not love the story.

Mm, possibly. Or even follow-up with critters of "and what did you think about _______?"

Yus. It's a delicate balance. Maybe the critters will comment on the things you're worried about ("does this ending work?"), maybe they won't. It's good to have the option of follow-up questions.

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

There's that, and also that genre people may be better able to pick genre conventions. Of course, not-genre people may be the better viewpoint to go with, but we're providing the forum, not interpreting the results. :D